Subject: [mpls-tp] Comments to draft-he-mpls-tp-csf-03

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 06:21:05 -0800

Dear Authors,
would appreciate your consideration of my comments to your work:

   - I'd suggest to use presentation of ACH in the Figure 2 as presented in
   Figure 3 of RFC 4385 or Figure 1 of RFC 5586. In particular, second nibble
   of the ACH is Version field that is version number of PWACH/G-ACh and value
   is currently defined is 0.
   - as result of previous suggestion, Version in Figure 2 should be tagged
   as in the descriptive portion on page 6 "CSF Version"
   - somewhat general question about possible use of TLV(s) in CSF. You've
   decided not to use ACH TLV as defined in Section 3 RFC 5586. As I find that
   none of MPLS-TP OAM related drafts is using ACH TLV, please correct me if
   I'm wrong, either ACH TLV format not practical or we are not sufficiently
   disciplined in designs.
   - is 3-bit long Period of Flags field is referred in Section 3.4 CSF
   transmission period? What values it can take and how they might be
   interpreted? If CSF is application specific, perhaps it is more appropriate
   to signal its value as TLV?

Regards,
Greg