Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Update: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-05

From: Jonathan Harrison <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 07:22:20 +0000

Hi Greg,

I've got a question on draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-05 that I hope you can answer.  The description of LABEL_RANGE1 is as follows.

  "In this case the accompanying MaxLabelRange indicates the maximum 
   range of the labels. The corresponding label set is used to indicate 
   the overall label range. Specific center label information can be 
   obtained from dynamic label in use information. It is assumed that 
   both center label and range tuning can be done without causing faults 
   to existing signals."

>From this, it isn't entirely clear to me what labels may or may not be used on a port advertising this type of Port Label Restriction - is it just the set of labels in the label set field?  Would it be possible for you to add an example in Appendix A to give an example of how LABEL_RANGE1 might be used (and how the specific center label information would be obtained from the dynamic label in use information)?

Thanks,
Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Greg Bernstein
Sent: 25 May 2011 19:03
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [CCAMP] Update: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-05

Hi CCAMPers interested in WSON, the previous draft (version 04) of 
"General Network Element Constraint Encoding for GMPLS Controlled 
Networks" was expiring so we needed to refresh with a new version. There 
are no changes technical or otherwise in the document.

This document and four other WSON documents are ready for last call but 
were deferred pending a write up from Pierre Peloso concerning some type 
of alternative information model and encoding. In the CCAMP Prague 
meeting minutes (http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/80/minutes/ccamp.htm) 
there was a commitment to resolve this issue quickly. It has now been 
two months.  On April 2 we furnished an analysis of what we though the 
scheme proposed by Peloso was and demonstrated that the proposed 
increase in complexity might save 10-20 bytes, an insignificant amount.

Was an alternate information/encoding still being pursued by Peloso or 
others? If so when can we see it? Or can we finally move these documents 
into last call.

Best Regards

Greg

-- 
===================================================
Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237

_______________________________________________
CCAMP mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp