Subject: RE: [PWE3] WG Last Calldraft-ietf-pwe3-tdm-control-protocol-extensi-04.txt

From: "Sasha Vainshtein" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 16:14:25 +0300

Stewart and all,
It looks as if the LC has ended without any comments on the list.

Regards,
                  Sasha

-----Original Message-----
From: Stewart Bryant [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 5:28 PM
To: pwe3
Subject: [PWE3] WG Last
Calldraft-ietf-pwe3-tdm-control-protocol-extensi-04.txt

This is to announce the start of last call on

draft-ietf-pwe3-tdm-control-protocol-extensi-04.txt
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pwe3-tdm-control-protocol-extensi
-04.txt>

Which together with diffs from the previous version can be found at:

http://tools.ietf.org/wg/pwe3/draft-ietf-pwe3-tdm-control-protocol-exten
si/

Last Call will end Sunday 7th October.

Please review this draft

Thanks

Stewart

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

---

From: Carlos Pignataro <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:56:21 -0400

I realize that this WGLC ended, but wanted to send a couple of comments
that I hope can be considered WGLC comments. Apologize for the delay,
hope these are useful.

1. Introduction

 Setup of TDM PWs using L2TPv3 will be defined in a separate document.

I think that it would help to add a pointer citation to
draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm here, and corresponding Informational Reference.
draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm would likely use some of the field definitions
from here.

---

3.4. TDMoIP AAL1 mode (0x0F - subject to IANA approval)
...
    0 unstructured AAL1
    2 structured AAL1
    3 structured AAL1 with CAS.

3.5. TDMoIP AAL2 Options (0x10 - subject to IANA approval)
...
      0 means that the CID is only switched by signaling
      1 means that voice activity detection is employed
      3 means this channel is always active. In particular, this channel

Is there a reason for skipping values in these fields? Or are these
numerical values coming from a definition elsewhere?

   Encoding specifies native signal processing performed on the payload.
   When no native signal processing is performed (i.e. G.711 encoding)
   this field MUST be zero.

For the encoding field, are the possible values defined in AAL2 SSCS or
in other document? For the value of zero (G.711), is it needed to
specify in signaling A-law or u-law?

---

3.7. TDM Options (0x0B)
...
 F, X               Reserved for future extensions. MUST be cleared
                     when distributed and MUST be ignored upon reception

Since bit "F" is not used and is reserved, would it be more clear to
label it "X" as well?

---

4. Extending CESoPSN Basic NxDS0 Services with CE Application
    Signaling
...
     c) Have the same values of all the Interface Parameters with the
        exception of the code point in the SP field of the TDM Options
        parameter:

This item refers to all "TDM-specific Interface Parameters" (and not
necessarily all of them, like the Description), correct?
Also, if in this case RTP Timestamp  is used to sync the two PWs, would
another condition in this section be that RTP header be used?

Thanks,

--Carlos.

On 9/19/2007 10:28 AM, Stewart Bryant said the following:
> draft-ietf-pwe3-tdm-control-protocol-extensi-04.txt <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pwe3-tdm-control-protocol-extensi-04.txt>
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/pwe3/draft-ietf-pwe3-tdm-control-protocol-extensi/
> 

-- 
--Carlos Pignataro.
Escalation RTP - cisco Systems