RE: LMP

["Bradford, Richard" <rbradfor@cisco.com>]

At 11:30 AM 3/1/2002 -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
>Bert,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 2:26 PM
> > To: ccamp-wg
> > Subject: LMP
> >
> >
> >
> > When I look at section 14, then I wonder:
> >
> >   LOCAL_CCID:  Class = 1, C-Type = 1, 4 byte CC_id
> >   REMOTE_CCID: Class = 2, C-Type = 1, 4 byte CC_id
> >
> > Why is that not:
> >
> >   CCID: Class = 1, LOCAL: C-Type = 1, 4 byte CC_id
> >   CCID: Class = 1, LOCAL: C-Type = 2, 4 byte CC_id
>This change is fine with me unless there is objection from others.

I'll raise an objection. Throughout the draft the Class is being used to 
define the meaning of the object and C-type its format. Local and remote 
CCIDs are two completely different objects. They are as different as remote 
and local node-IDs. They are not different formats of the same object.


--
Rich Bradford          Email: rbradfor@cisco.com
Cisco Systems, Inc.    Tel: 978-497-3079
300 Apollo Drive       Fax: 978-497-3079
Chelmsford, Mass 01824