Re: Comments on draft-ietf-ccamp-inter-domain-rsvp-te-01.txt

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

Hi Arthi,

I'm sorry that there is a conflict for these bits. Way back in the distant
past a predecessor of your I-D had the Contiguous bit at 0x02 and the
Stitching bit at 0x03 while it also had a Crankback bit at 0x01. There was
an obvious conflict even then with the Crankback I-D and I started the
registry to try to resolve this and sent mail to the MPLS and CCAMP lists.

Obviously I didn't draw it to your attention well enough.

I don't think that you can claim to predate the crankback work which was
already at revision 6 in June 2003. But that probably isn't important.

We have a conflict we need to resolve.

Since the Crankback I-D completed WG last call in April this year and was
passed to the ADs in May, I think it "wins".

Cheers,
Adrian

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Arthi Ayyangar" <arthi@juniper.net>
To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: "'Jean Philippe Vasseur'" <jvasseur@cisco.com>; <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 1:56 AM
Subject: Re: Comments on draft-ietf-ccamp-inter-domain-rsvp-te-01.txt


> Hi Adrian,
>
> Sorry for the delay (as usual) and thanks for your comments (as usual).
> I have incorporated your comments and suggestions for the next rev. Just
> one major point of contention. See below.
>
> > Section 4.1 (also section 9.1)
> >   0x01 (TBD): Contiguous LSP bit - this flag is set by the head-end
> >   node that originates the inter-domain TE LSP if it desires a
> >   contiguous end-to-end TE LSP (in the control & data plane). When
set,
> >   this indicates that a boundary node MUST not perform any stitching
or
> >   nesting on the TE LSP and the TE LSP MUST be routed as any other TE
> >   LSP (it must be contiguous end to end). When this bit is cleared, a
> >   boundary node may decide to perform stitching or nesting. A
mid-point
> >   node not supporting contiguous TE LSP MUST send a Path Error message
> >
> > a. s/MUST not/MUST NOT/
> > b. I have allocated bit number 4 (0x08) in the temporary registry of
> > LSP_ATTRIBUTE bits available at http://www.olddog.co.uk/lsp-attrib.txt
as
> > a place holder until the IANA takes over this work. (I think we've
> > discussed this before -  the point of the temporary registry is to
save
> ---------> This has been 0x01 for Contiguous LSP desired and 0x02 for
> Stitching desired since the beginning of any of these drafts, through
the
> merger and split. And I remember that the LSP Attributes registry used
to
> carry the matching numbers before. But looks like other drafts have
> appeared and now the numbers for the inter-domain IDs in the registry no
> longer match the ones in the IDs.
>
> Just one point that these inter-domain IDs predate most of the other IDs
> actually (in fact we went the LSP ATTRIBUTES path because we ran out of
> bits for the inter-domain IDs), so I am not sure what you propose we do
> at this point.
>
> thanks,
> -arthi