Rev of MULTI_TSPEC ID

"James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com> Fri, 29 October 2010 00:24 UTC

Return-Path: <jmpolk@cisco.com>
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 088CD3A69B0 for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 17:24:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.048, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 qr9e6CGGaBdQ for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 17:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3733B3A67A3 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 17:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEALOxyUyrR7H+/2dsb2JhbAChVXGiKZwlhUgEhFeLBQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.58,255,1286150400"; d="scan'208";a="375554495"
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Oct 2010 00:26:33 +0000
Received: from jmpolk-wxp01.cisco.com (rcdn-jmpolk-8715.cisco.com [10.99.80.22]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o9T0QWYa023203 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:26:33 GMT
Message-Id: <201010290026.o9T0QWYa023203@sj-core-2.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 19:26:31 -0500
To: tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
From: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
Subject: Rev of MULTI_TSPEC ID
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
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>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:24:41 -0000

TSVWG

We've revved the MULTI_TSPEC ID here
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-polk-tsvwg-intserv-multiple-tspec-05.txt

We've added

- a more complete Multicast section, and

- a new error code to indicate whether or not a router that indicates 
it does not have sufficient BW to grant this request has tried each 
of the TSPECs within a MULTI_TSPEC RSVP message, or if it didn't, 
this would mean the router is on supporting this IntServ extension 
and a new reservation request can be attempted using a TSPEC asking 
for less BW. We think this is important to know when handling errors to RESVs.

Comments are appreciated

James
(obviously, without my WG chair hat on)