Subject: Re: RSVPTE questions, please help me for this, thanks

From: "Hong Liao" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 18:19:32 -0500

Thanks,
It makes sense.

Julia

                    David Charlap                                                                                   
                    <David.Charlap@ma        To:     [email-masked]                                                    
                    rconi.com>               cc:     (bcc: Hong Liao/Telcordia)                                     
                                             Subject:     Re: RSVPTE questions, please help me for this, thanks     
                    11/05/01 05:44 PM                                                                               

Hong Liao wrote:
>
> But Label object in the Rsvpte is mandatory, if the ResvTear use
> the same structure of the Resv msg for the flow descriptor list,
> them Label object is a mandatory, too. The draft should be more
> clear for this.

Who cares?  The intention of the message is clear - tear down the
specified reservation - and the existing objects are sufficient to
perform that teardown.  A LABEL in this context is really irrelevant.
Since the draft doesn't require you to reject the ResvTear message under
this circumstance, the ambiguity remains.  You are free to choose either
path.  I would recommend choosing the one that allows you to
interoperate with as many others as possible.

-- David

---

From: "Hong Liao" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:44:19 -0500

Hi,

If that is the case, then I think they need to redefine the ResvTear FF
flow descriptor list, and not including the Label object.

I more agree with what you said before, since they did not refine the
ResvTear FF/SE flow descriptor list, it should have Label in ResvTear msg
when you send it out,  but ignore it if there is no Label in the ResvTear
msg.

>>When it's your turn to send out ResvTear messages, you should be able to
>>include the LABEL object, even if you did not receive one.  You should
>>do so if it is at all possible.  This is being conservative in what you
>>send.

Please let me know if this is a good suggestion.

Thanks a lot.

Julia

                    David Charlap                                                                                   
                    11/08/01 08:08 PM                                                                               

Hong Liao wrote:
>
> Sorry I brought up the old topic, but I found something.
>
> I found that draft rsvpte 09.txt, the section 3 LSP Tunnel related
> message formats,
>
> Object name                       Applicable RSVP message
>
> Label object        Resv
>
> Does it mean that the Label object is only in the Resv msg? But
> if that is the case, the ResvTear msg still use the FF flow
> descriptor from Resv formate, I know ResvTear msg was not redefined.

It's only required in the Resv message.

It is still wrong, IMO, to reject a message simply because it contains
an object you don't require.  If you don't need it, ignore it,.

Note, however, that this is only if the unnecessary object is of a known
class.  If you get an unknown class object, you should still handle it
according to the unknown-object processing rules (reject the message,
ignore the object, or forward the object, depending on class number.)

> So my question is that if there Label msg should not be in the
> ResvTear msg at all or it is optional, just like you mentioned in
> you last email,

I don't think it should be there.  But I don't see a compelling reason
to reject the message if it is present.

-- David