Re: [Tsvwg] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-05.txt

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Tue, 01 April 2008 16:38 UTC

Return-Path: <tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tsvwg-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ECFA28C47F; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 09:38:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C7F928C353 for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 09:38:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.967
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.967 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.632, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sC-f0g6srAgi for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 09:38:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3767D28C23C for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 09:38:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id m31GcFud015687; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 17:38:15 +0100
Received: from your029b8cecfe (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m31GcDdd015662; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 17:38:15 +0100
Message-ID: <033f01c89416$c7a43d00$0300a8c0@your029b8cecfe>
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: tsvwg IETF list <tsvwg@ietf.org>, Francois Le Faucheur IMAP <flefauch@cisco.com>
References: <E390FA57-D02D-4982-964D-CE3292D86DD4@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:38:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="response"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-05.txt
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org

Well, what do you think?
We intended to allow error values to be defined in the future if someone
comes up with a reason.

The precedent in RFC 2205 is that only Error Values that are defined are
mentioned. Error Codes that have no Error Values are defined with no mention
of the Error Value. For example, Error Code 3, 4, or 6.

We could curtail this explicitly in the draft if there is demand from the
group.

Cheers,
Adrian

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Francois Le Faucheur IMAP" <flefauch@cisco.com>
To: "tsvwg IETF list" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-05.txt


> Hi,
>
> I think this document is ready to move forward.
>
> One small suggestion perhaps. It probably wouldn't hurt to be  explicit 
> about the "Error Value" field of the ERROR_SPEC (when Error  Code = "User 
> Error Spec"). I understand this field is basically not  to serve any 
> purpose ("No Error Values are defined), suggesting a  "MUST be set to zero 
> on transmit and MUST be ignored on receipt" .
>
> Francois
>
>
> ===============================================================
> Updated after discussion with Jukka.
> Adrian
>
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
> directories.
> Title           : User-Defined Errors for RSVP
> Author(s)       : G. Swallow, A. Farrel
> Filename        : draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-05.txt
> Pages           : 8
> Date            : 2008-04-01
>
> The Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) defines an ERROR_SPEC object
> for communicating errors.  That object has a defined format that
> permits the definition of 256 error codes.  As RSVP has been
> developed and extended, the convention has been to be conservative in
> defining new error codes.  Further, no provision for user-defined
> errors exists in RSVP.
>
> This document defines a USER_ERROR_SPEC to be used in addition to the
> ERROR_SPEC to carry additional user information related to errors.
>
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error- 
> spec-05.txt
>
>