Subject: ordering of parameters in SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC

From: JC Ferguson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 16:10:16 -0500

RFC 2210 discusses the format of SENDER_TSPEC, FLOWSPEC, and ADSPEC.  In
section 3.3, the following is stated regarding order:

   Data fragments must always appear in an ADSPEC in service_number
   order. In particular, the default general parameters fragment
   (service_number 1) always comes first.

   Within a data fragment, the service-specific data must alway come
   first, followed by any non-default general parameters which may be
   present, ordered by parameter_number. The size and structure of the
   service-specific data is fixed by the service definition, and does
   not require run-time parsing. The remainder of the fragment, which
   carries non-default general parameters, varies in size and structure
   depending on which, if any, of these parameters are present. This
   part of the fragment must be parsed by examining the per-parameter
   headers.

Can one safely assume that this also applies to the FLOWSPEC (seems
implicit in this case by the example in section 3.2.2) and the
SENDER_TSPEC?  The reasoning is, both of these objects employ the same
formats (the service frame filled with parameters) as the ADSPEC, and it
would only make sense to make this true for all objects following this
format (it would certainly help in writing the code!).

thanks, 
jc

-- 
==============================================================
JC Ferguson              "Control for smilers can't be bought"
Cisco Systems Inc.
email:[email-masked] / voice:978-244-8671 / fax:978-244-8126

---

From: "Abes, Andi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 11:45:34 -0500

There's a minor hitch in your well presented arguments:
Both RSPEC's and TSPECS will only carry one service at most.
In RSPEC, the receiver asks for a specific reservation, which 
will only provide one certain service to the session.

In TSPEC, only the global token bucket parameter is availabe.
The sender does not specify any QoS service.

As opposed to them, the ADSPEC actually carries information
about the node and the path the session traverses, not just 
about the session. It is thus carrying information about
all the QoS services the node can offer.

So the short answer, there's no ordering constraints for RSPEC
and TSPEC, since they'll only carry one piece on information.

Andi.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: JC Ferguson [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2000 4:10 PM
> To: RSVP-external-mailing-list
> Subject: ordering of parameters in SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC
> 
>