Subject: RE: [Isis-wg] Further short CCAMP WG Last Call ondraft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-03.txt

From: "LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 18:39:42 +0100

Hi Lee

We've just submitted v04 that accounts for your comments.

Thanks,

JL 

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Envoyé : vendredi 15 décembre 2006 19:23
> À : [email-masked]; LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN; 
> [email-masked]
> Cc : [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Objet : RE: [Isis-wg] Further short CCAMP WG Last Call 
> ondraft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-03.txt 
> 
> 1)The use of TLV and sub-TLV is not consistent throughout the 
> document regarding IS-IS. For example, in the second and 
> third paragraphs of Section 4.2:
> 
>    The IS-IS TE Node Capability Descriptor TLV is carried 
> within an IS-
>    IS CAPABILITY TLV which is defined in [OSPF-CAP].
> 
>    The format of the IS-IS TE Node Capability sub-TLV is the 
> same as the 
>    TLV format used by the Traffic Engineering Extensions to IS-IS 
>    [RFC3784]. That is, the TLV is composed of 1 octet for the type, 1 
>    octet specifying the TLV length and a value field.
> 
> "TLV" should be "sub-TLV" in all cases except when referring 
> to the IS-IS CAPABILITY TLV.
> Also [OSPF-CAP] should be [IS-IS-CAP]
> 
> Similar changes needed in Section 5.2 and some other places.
> 
> 2)In Section 5.2:
> 
>    The TE Node Capability Descriptor TLV is OPTIONAL and MUST 
> NOT appear 
>    more than once in an ISIS Router Capability TLV. If a TE Node 
>    Capability Descriptor TLV appears more than once in an ISIS 
>    Capability TLV, only the first occurrence MUST be processed, other 
>    occurrences MUST be ignored.
> 
> I would prefer that the second sentence be omitted - for 
> reasons that have been discussed in the context of the PCE 
> draft - I have repeated the relevant comments here:
> 
> <snip>
> In cases where a TLV may move from one LSP fragment to 
> another (for example because of the addition of information 
> which exceeds the carrying capacity of the original LSP 
> fragment) a router may have multiple copies of the same TLV 
> as a transient condition. It is impossible to know which of 
> the copies is newer and therefore impossible to 
> deterministically decide which is the first instance of a 
> subTLV. So it is better to leave the behavior in this case as 
> undefined.
> <end snip>
> 
>    Les
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 3:33 AM
> > To: LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN; [email-masked]
> > Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> > Subject: [Isis-wg] Further short CCAMP WG Last Call 
> > ondraft-ietf-ccamp-te- node-cap-03.txt
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Sorry, I fumbled this.
> > 
> > Jean-Louis made some significant changes after we completed the 
> > working group last call. He took on board the comments from CCAMP, 
> > ISIS and OSPF and made the changes that he describes below.
> > 
> > Since one of these changes is relatively substantial (the 
> conflation 
> > of two bit-fields into one) I want to give everyone a chance to 
> > comment before we go forward to the ADs.
> > 
> > So, there is a one week last call running on the CCAMP mailing list 
> > until noon GMT 22nd December 2006.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Adrian
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN" <jeanlouis.leroux@orange- 
> > ftgroup.com>
> > To: <[email-masked]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 7:25 AM
> > Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-03.txt
> > 
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > This new version accounts for comments received during the 
> CCAMP ISIS 
> > and OSPF WG last call.
> > 
> > Here are the main changes:
> > 
> > -The data plane and control plane cap sub-TLVs have been 
> removed. The 
> > capabilities are now carried directly with the TE Node Capability 
> > Descriptor TLV, and there is a single registry for both control and 
> > data plane capabilities.
> > 
> > -In section 5:
> > "other occurences MUST be discarded" replaced by "other occurrences 
> > MUST be ignored"
> > 
> > -In section 6:
> > "a router not supporting the TE Node Capability Descriptor TLV MUST 
> > just silently ignore the TLV"
> > Replaced by: "a router not supporting the TE Node Capability 
> > Descriptor TLV will just silently ignore the TLV"
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > JL
> > 
> > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > De : [email-masked]
> > > [mailto:[email-masked]] De la part de 
> > > [email-masked] Envoyé : mardi 21 novembre 2006 
> 21:50 À : 
> > > [email-masked] Cc : [email-masked] Objet : I-D 
> > > ACTION:draft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-03.txt
> > >
> > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line 
> Internet-Drafts 
> > > directories.
> > > This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement 
> > > Plane Working Group of the IETF.
> > >
> > > Title : IGP Routing Protocol Extensions for Discovery of Traffic 
> > > Engineering  Node Capabilities
> > > Author(s) : J. Vasseur, et al.
> > > Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-03.txt
> > > Pages : 13
> > > Date : 2006-11-21
> > >
> > > It is highly desired in several cases, to take into 
> account Traffic
> > >    Engineering (TE) node capabilities during Multi Protocol Label
> > >    Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic 
> Engineered
> > >    Label Switched Path (TE-LSP)  selection, such as for 
> instance the
> > >    capability to act as a branch Label Switching Router (LSR) of a
> > >    Point-To-MultiPoint (P2MP) LSP. This requires advertising these
> > >    capabilities within the Interior Gateway Protocol 
> (IGP). For that
> > >    purpose, this document specifies Open Shortest Path First
> > > (OSPF) and
> > >    Intermediate System-Intermediate System (IS-IS) traffic 
> > > engineering
> > >    extensions for the advertisement of control plane and 
> data plane
> > >    traffic engineering node capabilities.
> > >
> > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> > > 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-03.
> > > txt
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Isis-wg mailing list
> > [email-masked]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
>