Subject: [PCN] PCN Encoding Comparison Draft Open Issues

From: "Kwok-Ho Chan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:26:41 -0500

The current open issues for:
   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chan-pcn-encoding-comparison-01.txt
are documented at:
   http://standards.nortelnetworks.com/pcn/PCN_Encoding_Comparison_Draft_OpenIssues.txt

This file will be updated based on discussions and resolutions of 
these and additional
open issues for the draft.

Please review the draft and the issues list.

E-Mail list discussions on the open issues should have:
"EC Issue 03.c" as the start of the E-Mail subject field for
"PCN Encoding Comparison Draft Issue 3 Sub-Issue a"
to help multiple drafts, multiple issues, discussion management.

Please let me know if you want any changes/corrections/additions to this file.
For example: the creation of a new issue, or sub-issue of an existing issue.

I have the content of the Issues List cut-and-pasted below in this E-Mail.
But will be using the file as the master copy going forward.

Thank you very much for your time and attention to this work.
-- Kwok --

Content of the PCN Encoding Comparison Draft Issues List file:

Issues List for PCN Encoding Comparison Draft
=============================================
Updated: Nov 28, 2007
Editor: Kwok Ho Chan
Draft:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-chan-pcn-encoding-comparison-01.txt

For further discussions, please use notations of:
- EComp03.c is used to reference Encoding Comparison draft Issue "03.c".
- "chan-01" is used to reference version -01 of the personal draft.

Issue #1: ECN Support in a PCN Domain
=====================================
The resolution of this issue will clarify how a PCN Domain needs
to treat ECN (RFC3168) packets, in terms of Interior Nodes and
Edge Nodes.  This issue arise with discussion on the Architecture
draft, but this will definitely impact the PCN Encoding Comparison
draft, with possible impact on the algorithm discussions.
The resolution of this issue will also solidify the definition of
a PCN Domain.
The starting point will be: Does the use of DiffServ sufficiently
define the logical boundaries of a PCN Domain?  Logical because
the same physical network device (router,switch,etc) may support
a PCN Domain as well as some other non-PCN domains.

Issue #2: Deletion of the Out of Band Channel Section
=====================================================
It have been proposed to remove chan-01 section 3.4 Out-of-Band
Channel as Encoding Transport.  This is considered to be out of scope
for the WG.  Would like some agreements on the list before removal.

Issue #3: Encoding States
=========================
The Encoding States indicated in chan-01 section 2 Encoding Requirements
needs to be better defined and clarified.
More specifically:
a. Removing PCN Capable Transport Marking (Non-PCN Capable Transport
    Marking) as a notion of Encoding State, just indicate the need
    for this separation as a requirment (possibly in the Architecture).
b. Better explanation/indication of Single Marking for both Admission
    Marking and Termination Marking
c. Possible additional encoding choices when DSCP+ECN fields are used.
d. Which Encoding States should the WG require?
    Should there be optional Encoding States?
    And their deployment options.
e. Is(are) "nounce" encoding state(s) needed?

Issue #4: Encoding Option Evaluation Criteria
=============================================
Need to add a section that indicates and describes the encoding option
evaluation criteria.  May want to add OAM impacts/considerations here or in
some new section.

Issue #5: Co-existence of PCN and ECN without use of tunnel
===========================================================
Need to determine if this should be addressed by this draft.

Issue #6: Use of PCN by multiple DiffServ Classes
=================================================
This can be added to the Intro section of this draft.
But this discussion may be more appropriate in the Arch draft.

Issue #7: ECMP considerations for PCN Encoding
==============================================
This should be one of the Encoding Option Evaluation Criteria.
But may also want to add new subsections under each of the
encoding choices on how they address this (and other) encoding
option evaluation criterion.

Issue #8: Document organization and text cleanup/addition
=========================================================
There are number of open issues relating to possible document
organization changes and addition of new text (or clean up of
existing text).  One of them is expansion on tunneling's impact
on encoding options.  Fixes to typo should also be part of this.

_______________________________________________
PCN mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn

---

From: "Kwok-Ho Chan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:46:09 -0500

If you have problem with the link to the Issues List,
You can use the link:
http://standards.nortel.com/pcn/PCN_Encoding_Comparison_Draft_OpenIssues.txt

Sorry for any inconvenience.
-- Kwok --