ScanMail Message: To Sender virus found or matched file blocking = setting.

From owner-mpls@UU.NET Sun Aug 3 07:52:04 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15493 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 07:52:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpadj00606 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 11:52:07 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpadj00017; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 11:51:55 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpadc16255 for mpls-outgoing; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 10:11:49 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpadc16250 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 10:11:46 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpadc15566 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 10:11:20 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpadc01628 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 10:11:19 GMT Received: from tiger.seabridge.co.il by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: bzq-25-127-226.cust.bezeqint.net [212.25.127.226]) id QQpadc01387 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 10:11:12 GMT Received: by tiger.seabridge.co.il with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Sun, 3 Aug 2003 13:10:09 +0200 Message-ID: From: Nurit Sprecher To: "'ccamp@ops.ietf.org'" , "'mpls@uu.net'" Cc: Nurit Sprecher Subject: Support of Graceful Restart for RSVP-TE Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 13:10:02 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C359AF.C909AFF0" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C359AF.C909AFF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" Hi all, Is there any standard/draft describing the procedure to graceful restart of RSVP-TE in order to minimize the negative effects on MPLS traffic caused by LSR's control plane restart? I can see that there was such a draft written by Pan. What is the status of the draft? Expired? Any progression with it? Thanks in advance, Nurit. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C359AF.C909AFF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all,

Is there any standard/draft describing the procedure to graceful = restart of RSVP-TE in order to minimize the negative effects on MPLS traffic = caused by LSR's control plane restart? =

I can see that there was such a = draft written by Pan. What is the status of the draft? Expired? Any = progression with it?

Thanks in advance, = Nurit.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C359AF.C909AFF0-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 4 04:46:57 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id EAA19878 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 04:46:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpagp21561 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:46:59 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpagp21500; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:46:57 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpagn12727 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:25:09 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpagn12720 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:25:04 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpagn10895 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:24:36 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpagn25069 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:24:35 GMT Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) id QQpagn25009 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 08:24:31 GMT Received: from FTRDMEL2.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.153]) by parsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 4 Aug 2003 10:24:01 +0200 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C35A61.BBCC8BD6" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6375.0 Subject: RE: Support of Graceful Restart for RSVP-TE Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 10:23:50 +0200 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Support of Graceful Restart for RSVP-TE Thread-Index: AcNZsnHUMNadXe+TS8We0eFHgrdbBQArvldQ From: "LE ROUX Jean-Louis FTRD/DAC/LAN" To: "Nurit Sprecher" , , "mpls@uu.net" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Aug 2003 08:24:01.0359 (UTC) FILETIME=[C23CADF0:01C35A61] Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35A61.BBCC8BD6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable See RFC 3473 section 9 =20 JL -----Message d'origine----- De : Nurit Sprecher [mailto:nurit.sprecher@SeabridgeNetworks.com] Envoy? : dimanche 3 ao?t 2003 13:10 ? : 'ccamp@ops.ietf.org'; 'mpls@uu.net' Cc : Nurit Sprecher Objet : Support of Graceful Restart for RSVP-TE Hi all,=20 Is there any standard/draft describing the procedure to graceful restart = of RSVP-TE in order to minimize the negative effects on MPLS traffic = caused by LSR's control plane restart?=20 I can see that there was such a draft written by Pan. What is the status = of the draft? Expired? Any progression with it?=20 Thanks in advance, Nurit. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35A61.BBCC8BD6 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

See = RFC 3473=20 section 9

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Nurit = Sprecher=20 = [mailto:nurit.sprecher@SeabridgeNetworks.com]
Envoyé :<= /B> dimanche=20 3 août 2003 13:10
À : = 'ccamp@ops.ietf.org';=20 'mpls@uu.net'
Cc : Nurit = Sprecher
Objet :=20 Support of Graceful Restart for RSVP-TE

Hi=20 all,

Is=20 there any standard/draft describing the procedure to graceful restart = of=20 RSVP-TE in order to minimize the negative effects on MPLS traffic = caused by=20 LSR's control plane restart?

I can see that there was such = a draft=20 written by Pan. What is the status of the draft? Expired? Any = progression with=20 it?

Thanks in advance,=20 Nurit.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C35A61.BBCC8BD6-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 4 18:57:20 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA14986 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 18:57:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpait01089 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 22:57:23 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpait29959; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 22:57:01 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpair25606 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 22:26:21 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpair25601 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 22:26:16 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpair13024 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 22:25:41 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpair18283 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 22:25:40 GMT Received: from mailsrv01.vasw by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: smtp.lopsys.com [209.183.201.132]) id QQpair18258 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 22:25:39 GMT Received: by mailsrv01.vasw with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 18:22:59 -0400 Message-ID: <35800AB26A91D711A75D00B0D07935F30389E3@mailsrv01.vasw> From: Michael Mandelberg To: "mpls@uu.net" Subject: Another Question re: P/NHOP in GMPLS Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 18:22:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C35AD6.F3384C00" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35AD6.F3384C00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" According to rfc 3473: A node that receives an IF_ID object SHOULD check whether the information carried in this object is consistent with the information carried in a received ERO, and if not it MUST send a PathErr Message with the error code "Routing Error" and error value of "Bad Explicit Route Object" toward the sender. This check CANNOT be performed when the initial ERO subobject is not the incoming interface. However, an LSR receiving a path message with an ero processes it as follows: if the LSR is a part of the node specified by the first subobject, it selects a hop, then *removes* that subobject. In other words, the ERO does not contain information about the route to get to that LSR, this information is in the RRO. This may be a minor point, but I want to make sure that I understand it properly. Shouldn't the text above say: A node that receives an IF_ID object SHOULD check whether the information carried in this object is consistent with the information carried in a received **RRO**, and if not it MUST send a PathErr Message with the error code "Routing Error" and error value of "Bad Explicit Route Object" toward the sender. This check CANNOT be performed when the initial **RRO** subobject is not the incoming interface. Am I mistaken? If so, why? Thanks Michael Mandelberg ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35AD6.F3384C00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
According to rfc=20 3473:

A node that receives an IF_ID object=20 SHOULD

check = whether the=20 information carried in this object is=20 consistent

with the = information=20 carried in a received ERO, and if not it=20 MUST

send a = PathErr=20 Message with the error code "Routing Error" and=20 error

value of = "Bad=20 Explicit Route Object" toward the sender. =20 This check

CANNOT = be performed=20 when the initial ERO subobject is not = the

incoming = interface.

However, an LSR receiving a = path message=20 with an ero processes it as follows: if the LSR is a part of the node = specified=20 by the first subobject, it selects a hop, then *removes* that = subobject. In=20 other words, the ERO does not contain information about the route to = get to that=20 LSR, this information is in the RRO.

This may be a minor = point, but I=20 want to make sure that I understand it properly. Shouldn't the text = above=20 say:

A node=20 that receives an IF_ID object SHOULD

check whether the = information=20 carried in this object is consistent

with the information = carried in a=20 received **RRO**, and if not it=20 MUST

send a PathErr Message = with the=20 error code "Routing Error" and error

value of "Bad Explicit = Route=20 Object" toward the sender. This=20 check

CANNOT be performed = when the=20 initial **RRO**=20 subobject is not the

incoming=20 interface.

Am I mistaken? If so,=20 why?

Thanks

Michael=20 Mandelberg

------_=_NextPart_001_01C35AD6.F3384C00-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 4 19:16:16 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id TAA15330 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 19:16:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaiv09658 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:16:20 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpaiv08449; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:15:53 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpaio02041 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:34:35 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpaio02036 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:34:33 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpaio09936 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:33:19 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaio09712 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:33:18 GMT Received: from mailsrv01.vasw by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: smtp.lopsys.com [209.183.201.132]) id QQpaio09691 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:33:17 GMT Received: by mailsrv01.vasw with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 17:30:37 -0400 Message-ID: <35800AB26A91D711A75D00B0D07935F30389E2@mailsrv01.vasw> From: Michael Mandelberg To: "mpls@uu.net" Subject: Question re: P/NHOP field for unnumbered interfaces in GMPLS Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 17:30:34 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C35ACF.A3D45E80" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35ACF.A3D45E80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" According to rfc 3473: The Hop Address and Logical Interface Handle fields are used per standard RSVP [RFC2205]. According to rfc 2205: This object carries the IP address of the interface through which the last RSVP-knowledgeable hop forwarded this message. But in the case of unnumbered interfaces, there is no such address. What should go in this field? A router ID? Thanks Michael Mandelberg ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35ACF.A3D45E80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

According to rfc = 3473:

The Hop Address and Logical Interface Handle fields=20 are used per standard RSVP=20 [RFC2205].

According to rfc=20 2205:

This object carries the = IP address=20 of the interface through which the last=20 RSVP-knowledgeable hop forwarded this message. =

But in the = case of=20 unnumbered interfaces, there is no such address. What should go in this = field? A=20 router ID?

&nb= sp;

Thanks

&nb= sp;

Michael=20 Mandelberg

&nb= sp;

------_=_NextPart_001_01C35ACF.A3D45E80-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Wed Aug 6 12:11:12 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22672 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 12:11:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpapc25803 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:11:15 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpapc25279; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:10:58 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpaow13442 for mpls-outgoing; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:43:07 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpaow13432 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:43:05 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpaow16587 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:42:49 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaow03098 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:42:49 GMT Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) id QQpaow03089 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:42:48 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.68.223.137) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Aug 2003 07:47:29 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h76EgguI003107 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 07:42:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABH60879; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:42:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h76EgfX24198 for mpls@uu.net; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:42:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpaow13370 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:41:34 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpaow12984 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:41:09 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaow07903 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:41:09 GMT Received: from ietf.org by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) id QQpaow07798 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:41:03 GMT Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA18977; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:40:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308061440.KAA18977@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: mpls@UU.NET From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:40:59 -0400 Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Forwarding Equivalence Class To Next Hop Label Forwarding Entry (FEC-To-NHLFE)Management Information Base Author(s) : T. Nadeau, C. Srinivasan, A. Viswanathan Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt Pages : 40 Date : 2003-8-6 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes managed objects for defining, configuring and monitoring Forwarding Equivalent Class (FEC) to Next Hop Label Forwarding Entry (NHLFE) mappings and corresponding actions for use with Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS). A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-6100712.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-6100712.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Wed Aug 6 17:44:34 2003 Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA06062 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:44:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpapy11757 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 21:44:37 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpapy10681; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 21:44:06 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpaoz07203 for mpls-outgoing; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:27:53 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpaoz07192 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:27:31 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpaoz15452 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:18:20 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaoz00555 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:18:20 GMT Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-1-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) id QQpaoz00533 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:18:19 GMT Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h76FIEtr029873 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 08:18:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABH65093; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:18:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h76FIDg25593 for mpls@uu.net; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:18:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpaoz06461 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:17:19 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpaoz09743 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:15:00 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaoz08102 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:15:00 GMT Received: from mx03.forces.gc.ca by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mx03.forces.gc.ca [131.137.245.203]) id QQpaoy08090 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:14:59 GMT Received: from asgard.ietf.org (asgard.ietf.org [132.151.6.40]) by mx03.forces.gc.ca (DND-Mailer) with ESMTP id 4EB6B206606 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:13:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordomo by asgard.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.14) id 19kPWr-0004qw-2O for ietf-announce-list@asgard.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:44:41 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([10.27.2.28]) by asgard.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 19kPTR-0004p2-8e for all-ietf@asgard.ietf.org; Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:41:09 -0400 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA18977; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:40:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308061440.KAA18977@ietf.org> To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: mpls@UU.NET From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-To: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:40:59 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; boundary="MIMEStream=_0+269257_1293905725044_05591482335" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk --MIMEStream=_0+269257_1293905725044_05591482335 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Forwarding Equivalence Class To Next Hop Label Forwarding Entry (FEC-To-NHLFE)Management Information Base Author(s) : T. Nadeau, C. Srinivasan, A. Viswanathan Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt Pages : 40 Date : 2003-8-6 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes managed objects for defining, configuring and monitoring Forwarding Equivalent Class (FEC) to Next Hop Label Forwarding Entry (NHLFE) mappings and corresponding actions for use with Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS). A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --MIMEStream=_0+269257_1293905725044_05591482335 Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; boundary="MIMEStream=_1+78996_08510295849160_80519628872" --MIMEStream=_1+78996_08510295849160_80519628872 Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-6100712.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt --MIMEStream=_1+78996_08510295849160_80519628872 Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-6100712.I-D@ietf.org> --MIMEStream=_1+78996_08510295849160_80519628872-- --MIMEStream=_0+269257_1293905725044_05591482335-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 7 01:30:22 2003 Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA18693 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 01:30:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpare09686 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 05:30:23 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpard08281; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 05:29:40 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpaqt05786 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:50:10 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpaqt05765 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:51 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpaqt16043 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:20 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaqt11519 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:13 GMT Received: from mailsrv01.vasw by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: smtp.lopsys.com [209.183.201.132]) id QQpaqt11344 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:07 GMT Received: by mailsrv01.vasw with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 22:46:12 -0400 Message-ID: <35800AB26A91D711A75D00B0D07935F30389E7@mailsrv01.vasw> From: Michael Mandelberg To: "mpls@uu.net" Subject: FW: Label Set question Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 22:46:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" How does the label set work with waveband labels? For the list form, are the subobjects waveband ids, or are the start and stop values listed as well? For the range form, again is it just ids? If not, then how is ordering defined to deterimine whether another band laebl is within the range? Thanks Michael Mandelberg ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

How does the=20 label set work with waveband labels? For the list form, are the = subobjects=20 waveband ids, or are the start and stop values listed as well? For the = range=20 form, again is it just ids? If not, then how is ordering defined to = deterimine=20 whether another band laebl is within the range?

Thanks

Michael=20 Mandelberg

------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 7 01:39:36 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA18817 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 01:39:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpare09662 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 05:39:39 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpare08743; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 05:39:20 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpaqx29719 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 03:48:11 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpaqx29714 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 03:48:06 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpaqx00444 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 03:47:33 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaqx14196 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 03:47:18 GMT Received: from fsnt.future.futsoft.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: [203.197.140.35]) id QQpaqx13992 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 03:47:07 GMT Received: from kailash.future.futsoft.com (unverified [203.197.140.36]) by fsnt.future.futsoft.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.6) with ESMTP id ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 09:20:13 +0530 Received: from nagasv (nagasv.future.futsoft.com [10.6.4.45]) by kailash.future.futsoft.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id h773dOFg023640; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 09:09:24 +0530 Message-ID: <009101c35c97$787ed160$2d04060a@future.futsoft.com> From: "Naga Srinivas V" To: "Michael Mandelberg" , References: <35800AB26A91D711A75D00B0D07935F30389E7@mailsrv01.vasw> Subject: Re: Label Set question Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 09:23:27 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008E_01C35CC5.8F1A8B20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_008E_01C35CC5.8F1A8B20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think, in rfc 3472 section 2.5.1. Procedures is explaning about the Labe= l set procedures, will help you. =20 http://community.roxen.com/developers/idocs/rfc/rfc3472.html=20 Thanks, srinivas. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Michael Mandelberg=20 To: mpls@uu.net=20 Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 8:16 AM Subject: FW: Label Set question How does the label set work with waveband labels? For the list form, are = the subobjects waveband ids, or are the start and stop values listed as wel= l? For the range form, again is it just ids? If not, then how is ordering d= efined to deterimine whether another band laebl is within the range? =20 Thanks =20 Michael Mandelberg *************************************************************************** This message is proprietary to Future Software Limited (FSL) and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. FSL accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. *************************************************************************** ------=_NextPart_000_008E_01C35CC5.8F1A8B20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think, in rfc = 3472 =20 section 2.5.1. Procedures is explaning about the Label set procedures,= will=20 help you.

http:= //community.roxen.com/developers/idocs/rfc/rfc3472.html

Thanks,

srinivas.

----- Original Message -----

Fro= m:=20 = Michael=20 Mandelberg

To: mpls@uu.net

Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 8:= 16=20 AM

Subject: FW: Label Set question

How = does the=20 label set work with waveband labels? For the list form, are the subobject= s=20 waveband ids, or are the start and stop values listed as well? For the ra= nge=20 form, again is it just ids? If not, then how is ordering defined to deter= imine=20 whether another band laebl is within the range?

Thanks=

Michael=20 Mandelberg

***************************************************************************=
This message is proprietary to Future Software Limited (FSL)
and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it
is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information
and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for
what it is intended.

If you have received this message in error, please notify the
originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient,
you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using,
copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message.
FSL accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from
the use of the information transmitted by this email including
damage from virus.
***************************************************************************=
------=_NextPart_000_008E_01C35CC5.8F1A8B20-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 7 02:29:58 2003 Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA02032 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:29:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpari14956 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 06:30:01 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQparh14429; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 06:29:42 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpaqt05786 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:50:10 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpaqt05765 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:51 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpaqt16043 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:20 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaqt11519 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:13 GMT Received: from mailsrv01.vasw by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: smtp.lopsys.com [209.183.201.132]) id QQpaqt11344 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:07 GMT Received: by mailsrv01.vasw with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 22:46:12 -0400 Message-ID: <35800AB26A91D711A75D00B0D07935F30389E7@mailsrv01.vasw> From: Michael Mandelberg To: "mpls@uu.net" Subject: FW: Label Set question Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 22:46:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" How does the label set work with waveband labels? For the list form, are the subobjects waveband ids, or are the start and stop values listed as well? For the range form, again is it just ids? If not, then how is ordering defined to deterimine whether another band laebl is within the range? Thanks Michael Mandelberg ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks

Michael=20 Mandelberg

------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 7 03:30:10 2003 Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA03200 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 03:30:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQparm24952 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 07:30:13 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQparl24255; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 07:29:50 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpaqt05786 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:50:10 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpaqt05765 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:51 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpaqt16043 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:20 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaqt11519 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:13 GMT Received: from mailsrv01.vasw by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: smtp.lopsys.com [209.183.201.132]) id QQpaqt11344 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:07 GMT Received: by mailsrv01.vasw with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 22:46:12 -0400 Message-ID: <35800AB26A91D711A75D00B0D07935F30389E7@mailsrv01.vasw> From: Michael Mandelberg To: "mpls@uu.net" Subject: FW: Label Set question Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 22:46:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" How does the label set work with waveband labels? For the list form, are the subobjects waveband ids, or are the start and stop values listed as well? For the range form, again is it just ids? If not, then how is ordering defined to deterimine whether another band laebl is within the range? Thanks Michael Mandelberg ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks

Michael=20 Mandelberg

------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 7 04:30:10 2003 Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA04465 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 04:30:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQparq28837 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 08:30:14 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQparp28093; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 08:29:54 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpaqt05786 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:50:10 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpaqt05765 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:51 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpaqt16043 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:20 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaqt11519 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:13 GMT Received: from mailsrv01.vasw by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: smtp.lopsys.com [209.183.201.132]) id QQpaqt11344 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 02:49:07 GMT Received: by mailsrv01.vasw with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 22:46:12 -0400 Message-ID: <35800AB26A91D711A75D00B0D07935F30389E7@mailsrv01.vasw> From: Michael Mandelberg To: "mpls@uu.net" Subject: FW: Label Set question Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 22:46:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" How does the label set work with waveband labels? For the list form, are the subobjects waveband ids, or are the start and stop values listed as well? For the range form, again is it just ids? If not, then how is ordering defined to deterimine whether another band laebl is within the range? Thanks Michael Mandelberg ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks

Michael=20 Mandelberg

------_=_NextPart_001_01C35C8E.0FA21DE0-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 7 10:59:03 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA17659 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 10:59:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpasp16867 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:59:04 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpasp15657; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:58:32 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpasn23603 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:21:04 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpasn23503 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:20:57 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpasn24748 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:20:02 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpasn06556 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:19:56 GMT Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-core-4.cisco.com [171.68.223.138]) id QQpasn06495 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:19:49 GMT Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h77EJgpr027640 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 07:19:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABI53206; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 10:19:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h77EJfo08100 for mpls@uu.net; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 10:19:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpase02422 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:08:31 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpase12197 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:07:11 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpase12122 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:06:55 GMT Received: from hotmail.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: law10-f94.law10.hotmail.com [64.4.15.94]) id QQpase11964 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:06:53 GMT Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 05:06:47 -0700 Received: from 199.172.169.20 by lw10fd.law10.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 07 Aug 2003 12:06:46 GMT X-Originating-IP: [199.172.169.20] X-Originating-Email: [cheenu_srinivasan@hotmail.com] Reply-To: cheenu@alumni.princeton.edu From: "Cheenu Srinivasan" To: mpls@UU.NET Cc: bwijnen@lucent.com, tnadeau@cisco.com, arunv@force10networks.com, dperkins@dsperkins.com, zinin@psg.com, swallow@cisco.com, loa.andersson@utfors.se, mreview@ops.ietf.org, adrian@olddog.co.uk, jcucchiara@mindspring.com, kireeti@juniper.net Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 08:06:46 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Aug 2003 12:06:47.0879 (UTC) FILETIME=[608B0570:01C35CDC] Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Version 8 of the FTN MIB has been posted. It incorporates all the comments received during the (latest) WG last call and A-D review. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-08.txt Thanks, Cheenu _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 7 13:28:31 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA23082 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 13:28:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpasz12270 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:28:33 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpasz10851; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:27:57 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpasp26116 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:48:01 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpasp26067 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:47:37 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpasp18177 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:46:59 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpasp20796 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:46:58 GMT Received: from rediffmail.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: webmail34.rediffmail.com [203.199.83.247] (may be forged)) id QQpasp20710 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:46:55 GMT Received: (qmail 14280 invoked by uid 510); 7 Aug 2003 14:46:46 -0000 Date: 7 Aug 2003 14:46:46 -0000 Message-ID: <20030807144646.14279.qmail@mailweb34.rediffmail.com> Received: from unknown (203.197.138.194) by rediffmail.com via HTTP; 07 aug 2003 14:46:46 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Anu Divya" Reply-To: "Anu Divya" To: mpls@UU.NET Subject: Clarification in Traffic Engineering Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Below mail thread discusses regarding the Traffic Engineering Extension of OSPF and CSPF. This discussion concludes that the Route selection through the network is performed using only the Unreserved Bandwidths for Class-Types. The Maximum Reservable Aggregate Bandwidth (which can be thought of as the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class-Type 0) is advertized for historical reasons, i.e. original IGP extensions for TE included it and we didn't want to simply remove it as our extensions are built on the original extensions. If we are going to use only Unreservered bandwith (for class-types) during Route calculation, what is the use of Maximum bandwidth in CSPF. Is this TLV also retained for historical reasons like Maximum Reservable Bandwidth? Question on BW advertisements for Diffserv aware TE based on Class Type From: "Sudhakar Ganti" Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 10:01:26 -0400 Cc: "mpls" Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3B027840.48CAD796@americasm01.nt.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Hi Darek, Thanks for your reply. If the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class Type-N is implicitly inferred, then I think the text in both these drafts should not refer to this as it is implementation / configuration specific. Second thing is that, it may be necessary to advertise this value. It gives an option for Traffic Engineering not to take paths that are overbooked for a given class if necessary. We may not be able to infer this from Unreserved bandwidth. If not, is there any other way to know about it? Thanks -Sudhakar -----Original Message----- From: owner-mpls@UU.NET [mailto:owner-mpls@UU.NET]On Behalf Of Darek Skalecki Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 8:53 AM To: Sudhakar Ganti Cc: mpls Subject: Re: Question on BW advertisements for Diffserv aware TE based on Class Type Hi Sudhakar, See inlined answers. Thanks, Darek Sudhakar Ganti wrote: Hello, A couple of questions regarding the BW advertisements on these drafts: draft-ietf-mpls-diff-te-ext-01.txt draft-ietf-ospf-diff-te-00.txt a) The text in both the drafts refers to "the Class-Type N bandwidth currently unreserved (i.e. the difference between the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class-Type N and the bandwidth reserved by existing Class-Type N LSPs)" However I do not see any separate sub-TLV for Max reservable bandwidth for each class type (class type N). There is only one that advertises the Max Reservable Aggregate Bandwidth. The Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class-Type N is reflected in the Unreserved Bandwidth for Class-Type N. That is, there is no need to advertize through IGP the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class-Type N as it is implicitely advertized in the Unreserved Bandwidth for Class-Type N. The intention is that the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class-Type N is configured on links that support Class-Type N. However, when it is time to advertize bandwidth availability for that link, only the Unreserved Bandwidth for Class-Type N is computed, as you stated by quoting the draft, and then advertized through IGP. Route selection through the network is then performed using only the Unreserved Bandwidths for Class-Types. The Maximum Reservable Aggregate Bandwidth (which can be thought of as the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class-Type 0) is advertized for historical reasons, i.e. original IGP extensions for TE included it and we didn't want to simply remove it as our extensions are built on the original extensions. b) Different classes can be oversubscribed differently depending upon the link (or network) configuration. If so, I think it may be necessary to advertise the Maximum Reservable bandwidth for each Class (Class-Type N). Is there any reason why this is omitted?? See my answer to a). Since Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class-Type N is implicitely "included" in the Unreserved Bandwidth for Class-Type N and it is the Unreserved Bandwidth for Class-Type N that is advertized through IGPs and used for route computation, there is no need to separately advertize Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class-Type N. To oversubscribe a link, the sum of Maximum Reservable Bandwidths for all Class-Types supported by the link needs to be greater than the capacity of the link. As I already mentioned, each Maximum Reservable Bandwidth for Class-Type N is configured on the link and used in the computation of the Unreserved Bandwidth for Class-Type N for advertizing purposes. -Sudhakar -- Darek Skalecki Nortel (613) 765-2252 ___________________________________________________ Download the hottest & happening ringtones here! OR SMS: Top tone to 7333 Click here now: http://sms.rediff.com/cgi-bin/ringtone/ringhome.pl From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 7 21:00:23 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA10551 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:00:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpatr16915; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:55:06 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpatg22982 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:09:51 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpatg22941 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:09:38 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpatg18834 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:04:35 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpatg07145 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:04:34 GMT Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) id QQpatg05908 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:04:04 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.71.177.254) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2003 12:09:04 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h77J3w7H002874 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:04:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABI85596; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:03:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h77J3vW13178 for mpls@uu.net; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:03:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpatg14576 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:02:28 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpatg23526 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:02:00 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpatg29886 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:01:59 GMT Received: from ietf.org by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) id QQpatg29867 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:01:57 GMT Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA27232; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:01:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308071901.PAA27232@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: mpls@UU.NET From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib-12.txt Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 15:01:51 -0400 Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR)Management Information Base Author(s) : C. Srinivasan, A. Viswanathan, T. Nadeau Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib-12.txt Pages : 57 Date : 2003-8-7 This memo defines an portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes managed objects to configure and/or monitor a Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR). A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib-12.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib-12.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib-12.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-7151751.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib-12.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib-12.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-7151751.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Fri Aug 8 00:20:39 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA14793 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 00:20:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpatr25948; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:46:09 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpasz06925 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:18:51 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpasz06909 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:18:41 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpasz14302 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:17:03 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpasz16742 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:17:02 GMT Received: from relay4.alcatel.be by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: alc245.alcatel.be [195.207.101.245]) id QQpasz16710 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:17:01 GMT Received: from bemail05.net.alcatel.be (bemail05.net.alcatel.be [138.203.144.16]) by relay4.alcatel.be (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h77HaD0N007078; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:36:13 +0200 Received: from alcatel.be ([138.203.67.40]) by bemail05.net.alcatel.be (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.11) with ESMTP id 2003080719164376:4495 ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:16:43 +0200 Message-ID: <3F328987.6010704@alcatel.be> Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 19:16:55 +0200 From: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Loa Andersson Cc: MPLS WG , George Swallow , Alex Zinin Subject: Re: preliminary mpls wg minutes References: <3F28D91D.3010608@pi.se> In-Reply-To: <3F28D91D.3010608@pi.se> X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on BEMAIL05/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 08/07/2003 19:16:43, Serialize by Router on BEMAIL05/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 08/07/2003 19:16:44, Serialize complete at 08/07/2003 19:16:44 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.28 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit loa, all, on the following: "Dimitri: (needs clarification, essence sounded like "is this really necessary?"). " point was as follows: "is it really necessary to use an RRO subobject flag to implement this feature since this i-d takes the use of the RRO subobject flag up to all but two bits used ?" thanks, - dimitri. Loa Andersson wrote: > All, > > the preliminary minutes form the MPLS WG in Vienna included. > > Thanks to Dave and Tove who took notes! > > -- Papadimitriou Dimitri E-mail : dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be Private: http://www.rc.bel.alcatel.be/~papadimd/index.html E-mail : dpapadimitriou@psg.com Public : http://psg.com/~dpapadimitriou/ Address: Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium Phone : +32 3 240-8491 From owner-mpls@UU.NET Fri Aug 8 00:48:37 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA15991 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 00:48:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaut18160 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 04:48:41 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpaut16998; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 04:48:06 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpatr15003 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:59:01 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpatr14998 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:58:58 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpatr15043 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:57:17 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpatr22071 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:57:16 GMT Received: from mailsrv01.vasw by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: smtp.lopsys.com [209.183.201.132]) id QQpatr19211 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:56:04 GMT Received: by mailsrv01.vasw with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:37:40 -0400 Message-ID: <35800AB26A91D711A75D00B0D07935F30389E9@mailsrv01.vasw> From: Michael Mandelberg To: "'Naga Srinivas V'" , mpls@UU.NET Subject: RE: Label Set question Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:37:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C35D2C.2001A9F0" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35D2C.2001A9F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" I'm afraid this does not answer the question. When using Label Set for wavebands, the subchannels are labels. The label for a waveband has three fields: a waveband id start label end label How is the subchannel specified? There are three possibilities: 1) It is just the waveband 2) It is the waveband, start/stop label triple 3) It is a single wavelength label If it is possibility three, this means that for each waveband label, multiple wavelength labels are listed. If it is one or two, then how is ordering defined in the case where the action field is set to inclusive or exclusive range? In other words, what procedure is to be used to decide if a given waveband label is in a given range? As an example, consider the following waveband labels: waveband label #1: waveband id = 1 start label = 12 stop label = 17 waveband label #2: waveband id = 1 start label = 14 stop label = 19 I'm assuming that both of these make sense, otherwise, if the start and stop values were implied by the wavband id, why include the start and stop labels at all? Now suppose a Label Set Object, with action = inclusive range, is specified. First, how is it specified? This is the same question stated above. Assume it is the lower and upper bounds are specifed by the two labels above. The question is, is the following label allowed by this range: waveband id = 1 start label = 13 stop label = 18 -----Original Message----- From: Naga Srinivas V [mailto:nagasv@future.futsoft.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 10:53 PM To: Michael Mandelberg; mpls@uu.net Subject: Re: Label Set question I think, in rfc 3472 section 2.5.1. Procedures is explaning about the Label set procedures, will help you. http://community.roxen.com/developers/idocs/rfc/rfc3472.html Thanks, srinivas. ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Mandelberg To: mpls@uu.net Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 8:16 AM Subject: FW: Label Set question How does the label set work with waveband labels? For the list form, are the subobjects waveband ids, or are the start and stop values listed as well? For the range form, again is it just ids? If not, then how is ordering defined to deterimine whether another band laebl is within the range? Thanks Michael Mandelberg *************************************************************************** This message is proprietary to Future Software Limited (FSL) and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. FSL accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus. *************************************************************************** ------_=_NextPart_001_01C35D2C.2001A9F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm afraid this=20 does not answer the question. When using Label Set for wavebands, the = subchannels are=20 labels. The label for a waveband has three = fields:

a waveband=20 id

=20 start label

=20 end label

How is the=20 subchannel specified? There are three = possibilities:

1) = It is just the=20 waveband

2) = It is the=20 waveband, start/stop label triple

3) = It is a single=20 wavelength label

If = it is=20 possibility three, this means that for each waveband label, multiple = wavelength=20 labels are listed. If it is one or two, then how is ordering = defined in the=20 case where the action field is set to inclusive or exclusive range? In = other=20 words, what procedure is to be used to decide if a given waveband label = is in a=20 given range? As an example, consider the following waveband=20 labels:

waveband label=20 #1:

waveband id =3D=20 1

start label =3D=20 12

stop label =3D=20 17

waveband label=20 #2:

waveband id =3D=20 1

start label =3D=20 14

stop label =3D=20 19

I'm assuming that both of these = make sense,=20 otherwise, if the start and stop values were implied by the wavband id, = why=20 include the start and stop labels at all?

Now suppose a Label Set Object, = with action=20 =3D inclusive range, is specified. First, how is it specified? This is = the same=20 question stated above. Assume it is the lower and upper bounds are = specifed by=20 the two labels above. The question is, is the following label allowed = by this=20 range:

waveband id =3D 1

start label =3D 13

stop label =3D 18

-----Original Message-----
From: Naga Srinivas V=20 [mailto:nagasv@future.futsoft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August = 06, 2003=20 10:53 PM
To: Michael Mandelberg; = mpls@uu.net
Subject: Re:=20 Label Set question

I think, in rfc=20 3472 section 2.5.1. Procedures is explaning about the = Label set=20 procedures, will help you.

ht= tp://community.roxen.com/developers/idocs/rfc/rfc3472.html

Thanks,

srinivas.

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Michael=20 Mandelberg

To: mpls@uu.net

Sent: Thursday, August 07, = 2003 8:16=20 AM

Subject: FW: Label Set = question

How does the=20 label set work with waveband labels? For the list form, are the = subobjects=20 waveband ids, or are the start and stop values listed as well? For = the range=20 form, again is it just ids? If not, then how is ordering defined to = deterimine whether another band laebl is within the=20 range?

Thanks

Michael=20 Mandelberg

*******************************************************= ********************
This=20 message is proprietary to Future Software Limited (FSL)
and is = intended=20 solely for the use of the individual to whom it
is addressed. It = may=20 contain privileged or confidential information
and should not be = circulated=20 or used for any purpose other than for
what it is = intended.

If you=20 have received this message in error, please notify the
originator=20 immediately. If you are not the intended recipient,
you are = notified that=20 you are strictly prohibited from using,
copying, altering, or = disclosing=20 the contents of this message.
FSL accepts no responsibility for = loss or=20 damage arising from
the use of the information transmitted by this = email=20 including
damage from=20 = virus.
**************************************************************= *************
------_=_NextPart_001_01C35D2C.2001A9F0-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Fri Aug 8 05:39:20 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA05573 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 05:39:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpatv09739 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 22:45:02 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpatu07098; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 22:43:57 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpatd00800 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 18:18:39 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpatd00793 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 18:18:33 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpatc19484 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 18:13:02 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpatc28512 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 18:13:00 GMT Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.189]) id QQpatc28396 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 18:12:56 GMT Received: from [212.227.126.155] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 19kpFw-000655-00 for mpls@uu.net; Thu, 07 Aug 2003 20:12:56 +0200 Received: from [80.139.6.75] (helo=192.168.1.10) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 3.35 #1) id 19kpFv-00066M-00 for mpls@uu.net; Thu, 07 Aug 2003 20:12:56 +0200 From: Stefan Winter To: mpls@UU.NET Subject: error in draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-11.txt Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 20:11:06 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200308072011.06891.mail@stefan-winter.de> Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, there is an inconsistency in the MIB definition of mplsTunnelHopTable in the current draft of MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. The DESCRIPTION clause of mplsTunnelHopTable claims that each row has two indexes, mplsTunnelHopListIndex (Index 1) and mplsTunnelHopIndex (Index 2). But the INDEX clause of mplsTunnelHopEntry has three indexes, mplsTunnelHopListIndex (Index 1) mplsTunnelHopPathOptionIndex (Index 2) mplsTunnelHopIndex (Index 3) The DESCRIPTION clause of mplsTunnelHopTable needs to be updated to reflect the correct indexing and should explain the secondry index mplsTunnelHopPathOptionIndex. Greetings, Stefan Winter From owner-mpls@UU.NET Fri Aug 8 14:44:18 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20558 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 14:44:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpaww24258 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 18:44:21 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpaww23756; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 18:44:05 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpawg05755 for mpls-outgoing; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 14:36:00 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpawg05738 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 14:35:57 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpawg12231 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 14:35:47 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpawg10602 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 14:35:46 GMT Received: from rediffmail.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: webmail33.rediffmail.com [203.199.83.245] (may be forged)) id QQpawg10573 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 14:35:44 GMT Received: (qmail 3243 invoked by uid 510); 8 Aug 2003 14:35:38 -0000 Date: 8 Aug 2003 14:35:38 -0000 Message-ID: <20030808143538.3242.qmail@mailweb33.rediffmail.com> Received: from unknown (203.197.138.199) by rediffmail.com via HTTP; 08 aug 2003 14:35:37 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Anu Divya" Reply-To: "Anu Divya" To: mpls@UU.NET Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Hi all, I am a new learner for TE and GMPLS extension of OSPF. Confused with various bandwidth parameters specified in the two drafts draft-katz-yeung-ospf-traffic-10.txt and draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-09.txt and their usage in CSPF. There are 5 bandwidths advertised in TE. 1. Maximum bandwidth - Physical link capacity (To be deprecated as per draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-06.txt) 2. Maximum reservable bandwidth - oversubscribed bandwidth. (Available for historic purpose, not used in CSPF) 3. Unreserved bandwidth per priority level 4. Max LSP Bandwidth per priority level. 5. Min LSP Bandwidth Assuming the following usage of Bandwidth in CSPF Maximum LSP bandwidth MLB[p] - Advertised in sub TLV 15 Minimum LSP bandwith mLB - Advertised in sub TLV 15 Unreserved bandwidth UB[p] - Advertized in subTLV 8 CSPF requested bandwidth CB [p] If the Link LSA does not have Link Descriptor TLV (non Optical Link), then UB[p] >= CB[p] else CB[p] > mLB and MLB[p] >= CB[p] But the Interface switching capability descriptor examples specified in draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-06.txt, in sections 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, only reservable bandwidth is available without priority (in TLV 15.) In sections 4.9, 4.10 - Only Max LSP bandwidth is specified without priority. In this scenario,how do we check the constrain CB[p]? Any help is very much appreciated. Thanks in advance, Anu. ___________________________________________________ Download the hottest & happening ringtones here! OR SMS: Top tone to 7333 Click here now: http://sms.rediff.com/cgi-bin/ringtone/ringhome.pl From owner-mpls@UU.NET Sat Aug 9 13:57:30 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA02597 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 13:57:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbal28649 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 17:57:32 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbal26315; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 17:56:02 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpayv27154 for mpls-outgoing; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 07:18:51 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpayv27149 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 07:18:45 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpayv21719 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 07:15:55 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpayv24482 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 07:15:55 GMT Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-1-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) id QQpayv24467 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 07:15:55 GMT Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h797Fptp007887 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 00:15:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABK08776; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 03:15:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h797Fou29501 for mpls@uu.net; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 03:15:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpayu26505 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 07:14:30 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpayu19542 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 07:12:02 GMT From: francis.arts@alcatel.be Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpayu24803 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 07:12:02 GMT Received: from relay4.alcatel.be by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: alc245.alcatel.be [195.207.101.245]) id QQpayu24788 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 07:12:01 GMT Received: from Bemail06.net.alcatel.be (bemail06.net.alcatel.be [138.203.144.83]) by relay4.alcatel.be (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h797Vn0N024603 for ; Sat, 9 Aug 2003 09:31:49 +0200 To: mpls@UU.NET Subject: RFC 3443 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.8 June 18, 2001 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 09:11:58 +0200 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL06/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 08/09/2003 09:12:00, Serialize complete at 08/09/2003 09:12:00 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 00278A2EC1256D7D_=" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.28 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 00278A2EC1256D7D_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello, I have a question on RFC 3443. Consider the following LSR: +=====+ +=====+ +=====+ +=====+ ===| A |===| B |===| C |===| D |=== +=====+ +=====+ +=====+ +=====+ LSP1 0=========X========0 LSP2 0=========X==================0 Assume that LSR D has advertised the implicit null label for LSP2. Assume that LSR B receives from LSR A a packet with the following TTLs: * ip-ttl = 20. * mpls-label-lsp2-ttl = 9. What are now the ip-ttl and mpls-label-lsp1-ttl values of the packet that LSR B sends to LSR C? Please consider the different possible cases where LSP1 and LSP2 can be of the uniform, pipe or short pipe model respectively. Regards, Francis. --=_alternative 00278A2EC1256D7D_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Hello,

I have a question on RFC 3443. Consider the following LSR:

+=====+ +=====+ +=====+ +=====+
===| A |===| B |===| C |===| D |===
+=====+ +=====+ +=====+ +=====+

LSP1 0=========X========0
LSP2 0=========X==================0

Assume that LSR D has advertised the implicit null label for LSP2.

Assume that LSR B receives from LSR A a packet with the following TTLs:
* ip-ttl = 20.
* mpls-label-lsp2-ttl = 9.
What are now the ip-ttl and mpls-label-lsp1-ttl values of the packet that LSR B sends to LSR C? Please consider the different possible cases where LSP1 and LSP2 can be of the uniform, pipe or short pipe model respectively.

Regards,

Francis. --=_alternative 00278A2EC1256D7D_=-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Sun Aug 10 16:56:15 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15840 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 16:56:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbep05429 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 20:56:17 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbep04905; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 20:56:04 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbdm04199 for mpls-outgoing; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 13:32:35 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpbdm04194 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 13:32:33 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpbdm13437 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 13:31:19 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbdm15214 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 13:31:18 GMT Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.177]) id QQpbdm15190 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 13:31:17 GMT Received: from [212.227.126.206] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 19lqI0-00009F-00 for mpls@uu.net; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 15:31:16 +0200 Received: from [80.132.50.192] (helo=philipp) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 19lqI0-00059S-00 for mpls@uu.net; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 15:31:16 +0200 Message-ID: <000901c35f43$bd6eab20$2202a8c0@WorkGroup> From: "Stefan Winter" To: Subject: suggestion for draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 15:31:43 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello! During implementing a management agent for the MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB a minor missing feature in the MIB showed up (at least in my understanding). The issue is about InSegments. When generating a new InSegment, one must specify the type of label, "generic","atm" or "frame relay". The type of label cannot be directly read. The current way to do so is to lookup the mplsInSegmentInterface column of the row, then look into IF-MIB::ifType.x and evaluate the ifType to guess which of the three is appropriate. Apart from the fact that looking up content of another MIB may be expensive, it not at always possible to determine the type of label. If, for example, ifType reports that the device is an ATM device, both the "atm" or the "generic" label types are possible (since "generic" is always an option). To overcome that limitation, two options seem to be possible. a) extend the mplsInterfaceTable with a column mplsInterfaceLabelType b) extend the mplsInSegmentTable with a column mplsInSegmentLabelType where b) is a more general solution as it allows to specify the type per-label and not only per-interface, as solution a) would do. The Syntax for such a column could be INTEGER { gen(0), atm(1), frame-relay(2) }. And as I write this, I realize that even OutSegments need to have the type of label specified... so the same limitation applies to OutSegments, too. These are just my 2 cents from an implementor�s view, a comment would be nice. Greetings, Stefan Winter From owner-mpls@UU.NET Sun Aug 10 23:27:07 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA22830 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 23:27:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbfp15921 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 03:27:09 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbfp15415; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 03:26:56 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpben20875 for mpls-outgoing; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 20:19:29 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpben20870 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 20:19:26 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbem15130 for ; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 20:10:15 GMT Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) id QQpauo10274 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 03:33:20 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.71.177.238) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2003 20:38:17 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h783X8LH002197 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 20:33:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABJ19972; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:33:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h783X7A18032 for mpls@uu.net; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:33:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpauo07848 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 03:30:42 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpauo04762 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 03:30:20 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpauo14712 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 03:30:18 GMT Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.72]) id QQpauo14685 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2003 03:30:17 GMT Received: from cisco.com (64.102.124.13) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2003 20:30:16 -0700 Received: from pentagon (pentagon.cisco.com [64.100.238.39]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h783UDxc001481; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:30:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tnadeauw2k (che-vpn-cluster-1-20.cisco.com [10.86.240.20]) by pentagon (8.10.2+Sun/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id h783UD812929; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:30:13 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" To: "'Stefan Winter'" , Subject: RE: error in draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-11.txt Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:30:09 -0400 Organization: Cisco Systems Message-ID: <014a01c35d5d$5edf9ac0$6501a8c0@amer.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 In-Reply-To: <200308072011.06891.mail@stefan-winter.de> Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please see draft version -12. This has been corrected there. --Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-mpls@UU.NET [mailto:owner-mpls@UU.NET] On Behalf > Of Stefan Winter > Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 2:11 PM > To: mpls@UU.NET > Subject: error in draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-11.txt > > > Hello, > > there is an inconsistency in the MIB definition of > mplsTunnelHopTable in the > current draft of MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. > The DESCRIPTION clause of mplsTunnelHopTable claims that each > row has two > indexes, mplsTunnelHopListIndex (Index 1) and > mplsTunnelHopIndex (Index 2). But the INDEX clause of > mplsTunnelHopEntry has three indexes, mplsTunnelHopListIndex > (Index 1) > mplsTunnelHopPathOptionIndex (Index 2) > mplsTunnelHopIndex (Index 3) > The DESCRIPTION clause of mplsTunnelHopTable needs to be > updated to reflect > the correct indexing and should explain the secondry index > mplsTunnelHopPathOptionIndex. > > Greetings, > > Stefan Winter > From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 11 13:28:44 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA24882 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:28:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbht02788 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 17:28:47 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbht02508; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 17:28:37 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbhd15863 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:25:58 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbhd15856 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:25:47 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbhd20744 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:25:39 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhd21039 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:25:38 GMT Received: from merlot.juniper.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: natint.juniper.net [207.17.136.129]) id QQpbhd21023 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:25:38 GMT Received: from juniper.net (garnet.juniper.net [172.17.28.17]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h7BDPbu08465; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 06:25:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from yakov@juniper.net) Message-Id: <200308111325.h7BDPbu08465@merlot.juniper.net> To: mpls@UU.NET, swallow@cisco.com cc: erosen@cisco.com Subject: draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-01.txt to PS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <79699.1060608337.1@juniper.net> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 06:25:37 -0700 From: Yakov Rekhter Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk George, I'd like to ask you to issue the Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-01.txt to move it to a Proposed Standard. Yakov. From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 11 13:51:38 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA25970 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:51:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhv13754 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 17:51:40 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbhv13058; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 17:51:18 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbhe16818 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:39:57 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpbhe16811 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:39:51 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbhe16596 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:36:52 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhe11706 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:36:52 GMT Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-1-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) id QQpbhe11693 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:36:51 GMT Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7BDamLH018616 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 06:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABK79604; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:36:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h7BDamM12588 for mpls@uu.net; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:36:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbhe16532 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:35:39 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbhe08908 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:35:24 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhe08107 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:35:24 GMT Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) id QQpbhe08095 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:35:23 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.71.177.254) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Aug 2003 06:41:18 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7BDZK7F009254; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 06:35:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bifocal.cisco.com (bifocal.cisco.com [161.44.172.150]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABK79512; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:35:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (swallow@localhost) by bifocal.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id JAA03117; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:35:19 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308111335.JAA03117@bifocal.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: bifocal.cisco.com: swallow owned process doing -bs To: Yakov Rekhter cc: mpls@UU.NET, swallow@cisco.com, erosen@cisco.com, swallow@cisco.com Subject: Re: draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-01.txt to PS In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 11 Aug 2003 06:25:37 PDT." <200308111325.h7BDPbu08465@merlot.juniper.net> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:35:19 -0400 From: George Swallow Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk I personally believe this document is ready for last call. I'll give it a few days before we start the official last call to see if there are any objections. ...George ======================================================================== George Swallow Cisco Systems (978) 936-1398 1414 Massachusetts Avenue Boxborough, MA 01719 From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 11 14:19:45 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA27050 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 14:19:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhx06807 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:19:48 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbhx06551; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:19:41 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbhr29424 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:45:33 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbhr29260 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:45:07 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbhq06401 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:51 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhq01335 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:50 GMT Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.72]) id QQpbhq01328 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:50 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.71.177.254) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Aug 2003 09:38:49 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7BGck7F024098 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:38:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABK96869; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:38:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h7BGcjL15193 for mpls@uu.net; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:38:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpbhq28069 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:30:30 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbhp05534 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:19 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhp26803 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:18 GMT Received: from ietf.org by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) id QQpbhp26767 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:17 GMT Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22078; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:29:11 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308111629.MAA22078@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: mpls@UU.NET From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-09.txt Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:29:11 -0400 Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definitions of Textual Conventions for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Management Author(s) : T. Nadeau, J. Cucchiara Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-09.txt Pages : 23 Date : 2003-8-8 This memo defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module which contains Textual Conventions to represent commonly used Mulitprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) management information. The intent is that these TEXTUAL CONVENTIONS (TCs) will be imported and used in MPLS related MIB modules that would otherwise define their own representations. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-09.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-09.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-09.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-11124842.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-09.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-09.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-11124842.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 11 14:23:26 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA27210 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 14:23:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhx13991 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:23:29 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbhx13845; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:23:24 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbhr29420 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:45:26 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbhr29258 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:45:06 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbhq06440 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:53 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhq10603 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:52 GMT Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) id QQpbhq10588 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:52 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.71.177.254) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Aug 2003 09:44:49 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7BGck7H024098 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABK96870; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:38:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h7BGcjp15202 for mpls@uu.net; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:38:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpbhp28014 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:59 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbhp11411 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:25 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhp26979 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:24 GMT Received: from ietf.org by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) id QQpbhp26934 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:23 GMT Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22095; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:29:17 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308111629.MAA22095@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: mpls@UU.NET From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-12.txt Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:29:16 -0400 Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering Management Information Base Author(s) : C. Srinivasan, A. Viswanathan, . Nadeau Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-12.txt Pages : 68 Date : 2003-8-8 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes managed objects for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) based traffic engineering. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-12.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-12.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-12.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-11124906.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-12.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-12.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-11124906.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 11 17:18:36 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA06857 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 17:18:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbij09392 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 21:18:41 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbij09133; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 21:18:34 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbhq28642 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:39:14 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpbhq28636 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:39:12 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpbhq13273 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:52 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhq26285 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:52 GMT Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.72]) id QQpbhq26268 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:38:51 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.68.223.137) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Aug 2003 09:38:50 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7BGcluG017596 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 09:38:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABK96871; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:38:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h7BGckc15211 for mpls@uu.net; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:38:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpbhq28068 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:30:30 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbhp05527 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:19 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbhp26802 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:18 GMT Received: from ietf.org by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) id QQpbhp26624 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:29:12 GMT Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22062; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:29:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308111629.MAA22062@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: mpls@UU.NET From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-13.txt Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:29:05 -0400 Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Definitions of Managed Objects for the Multiprotocol Label Switching, Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Author(s) : J. Cucchiara, H. Sjostrand, J. Luciani Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-13.txt Pages : 134 Date : 2003-8-8 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes managed objects for the Multiprotocol Label Switching, Label Distribution Protocol (LDP). A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-13.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-13.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-13.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-11124831.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-13.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-13.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-11124831.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 11 18:07:18 2003 Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA08382 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:07:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbim05304 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 22:07:22 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbim04975; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 22:07:07 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbif02745 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:18:52 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbif02728 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:18:30 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbif20525 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:17:55 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbif25643 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:17:54 GMT Received: from newdev.harvard.edu by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: newdev.eecs.harvard.edu [140.247.60.212]) id QQpbif25620 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:17:54 GMT Received: from newdev.harvard.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by newdev.harvard.edu (8.12.9/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h7BKHP9n011802; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:17:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from sob@localhost) by newdev.harvard.edu (8.12.9/8.12.2/Submit) id h7BKHPp8011801; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:17:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:17:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Scott Bradner Message-Id: <200308112017.h7BKHPp8011801@newdev.harvard.edu> To: mpls@UU.NET, swallow@cisco.com, yakov@juniper.net Subject: Re: draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-01.txt to PS Cc: erosen@cisco.com In-Reply-To: <200308111325.h7BDPbu08465@merlot.juniper.net> Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk I think the doc is almost ready to be forwarded to the IESG but two comments > The Protocol Number field in an IPv4 header and the Next Header field > in an IPv6 are set as follows: > > - X indicates an MPLS unicast packet, > > - Y indicates an MPLS multicast packet. (The use of the MPLS-in-IP > encapsulation for MPLS multicast packets is for further study.) the ID needs to have an IANA Considerations section to tell the IANA to assign the protocol values X & Y > 6. Security Considerations > > MPLS-in-IP or MPLS-in-GRE tunnels may be secured using IPsec. I predict that there will be pushback from the security ADs over the level of non-detail about how to use IP Sec to secure the links Scott From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 11 18:19:12 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA09335 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 18:19:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbin12300 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 22:19:13 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbin12046; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 22:19:05 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbib10293 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:26:43 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpbib10288 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:26:36 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbib15159 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:25:52 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbib12181 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:25:52 GMT Received: from qtech1.quarrytech.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: email.quarrytech.com [4.17.144.4]) id QQpbib12171 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 19:25:52 GMT Received: from MDUFFY1.quarrytech.com (MDUFFY1 [10.1.3.166]) by qtech1.quarrytech.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Q3Z2RNQV; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 15:25:51 -0400 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20030811152012.01fa4cc0@email> X-Sender: mduffy@email X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 15:24:11 -0400 To: George Swallow , Yakov Rekhter From: Mark Duffy Subject: Re: draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-01.txt to PS Cc: mpls@UU.NET, erosen@cisco.com In-Reply-To: <200308111335.JAA03117@bifocal.cisco.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk At 09:35 AM 8/11/2003 -0400, George Swallow wrote: >I personally believe this document is ready for last call. I'll give >it a few days before we start the official last call to see if there >are any objections. > >...George Hi, I sent some comments in response to the previous last call (?) in April, which have not been addressed. They are included below. Thanks, Mark >X-Sender: mduffy@email >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 >Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 17:38:33 -0400 >To: mpls@UU.NET,erosen@cisco.com >From: Mark Duffy >Subject: Re: MPLS WG Last Call draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-00.txt >In-Reply-To: <200303311913.OAA05418@bifocal.cisco.com> >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > >>This message begins an MPLS Workgroup last call on >> >> Encapsulating MPLS in IP or GRE >> draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-00.txt > >Hi, I have a few questions/comments on the draft. > >1. In section 2 there are protocol numbers 'X' and 'Y' called out. I >presume these are to be replaced with values assigned by IANA. I don't >know what the politics are by which values get assigned or denied but >since the 'Y' value for MPLS multicast "is for further study" perhaps IANA >should only be asked for an 'X' value at this time. I should think a >request for one value is more likely to succeed than a request for two. > > >2. In sect 4.1, there is a clear implication that the "Tunnel MTU" >describes the maximum sized *MPLS packet* that can be encapsulated in the >IP or GRE packet. Therefore I think the following paragraph is not quite >correct: > > In some cases, the tunnel head receives, for encapsulation, an IP > packet, which it first encapsulates in MPLS and then encapsulates in > MPLS-in-IP or MPLS-in-GRE. If the source of the IP packet is > reachable from the tunnel head, and if the result of this > encapsulation would be a packet whose size exceeds the Tunnel MTU, > then the tunnel head SHOULD use the Tunnel MTU value for the purposes > of fragmentation and PMTU discovery outside the tunnel. > >I think it should instead read something like: > > In some cases, the tunnel head receives, for encapsulation, an IP > packet, which it first encapsulates in MPLS and then encapsulates in > MPLS-in-IP or MPLS-in-GRE. If the source of the IP packet is > reachable from the tunnel head, and if the result of **the MPLS** > encapsulation would be a packet whose size exceeds the Tunnel MTU, > then the tunnel head SHOULD use the Tunnel MTU value, **less the size > of the added MPLS label stack,** for the purposes of fragmentation > and PMTU discovery outside the **MPLS LSPs and encapsulating** tunnel. > > >3. A few typos: > >In the last sentence of sect. 2 and the exact same text again at the last >sentence of sect. 3: s/is the topmost packet of the decapsulated >packet/is the topmost label of the decapsulated packet/ > >In sect 4.1 s/mpls packet be decapsulated/mpls packet can be decapsulated/ > >In sect 8 s/RFC7915/RFC791/ > >Thanks, >Mark From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 11 20:35:15 2003 Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA11929 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:35:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbiw14049 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 00:35:15 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbiw13776; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 00:35:01 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbif02970 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:21:22 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbif02934 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:21:04 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbif24256 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:20:05 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbif28728 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:20:05 GMT Received: from newdev.harvard.edu by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: newdev.eecs.harvard.edu [140.247.60.212]) id QQpbif28717 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 20:20:04 GMT Received: from newdev.harvard.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by newdev.harvard.edu (8.12.9/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h7BKK39n011817; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:20:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from sob@localhost) by newdev.harvard.edu (8.12.9/8.12.2/Submit) id h7BKK2jb011816; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:20:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:20:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Scott Bradner Message-Id: <200308112020.h7BKK2jb011816@newdev.harvard.edu> To: yakov@juniper.net Subject: one other thing about MPLS in IP/GRE Cc: mpls@UU.NET Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk since the terms MAY and MUST are used they need to be defined or RFC 2119 needs to be referenced (or the terms switched to lower case) Scott From owner-mpls@UU.NET Tue Aug 12 02:24:21 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA00226 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:24:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbjt17429 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:24:23 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbjt16856; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:24:04 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbjs27965 for mpls-outgoing; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:03:03 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpbjs27658 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:03:00 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbjs18667 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:01:55 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbjs15724 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:01:54 GMT Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) id QQpbjs15720 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:01:54 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.71.177.237) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Aug 2003 23:07:59 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7C61ptp028573 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 23:01:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABL51445; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:01:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h7C61nb29629 for mpls@uu.net; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:01:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbjr15828 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 05:59:59 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpbjr04793 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 05:57:24 GMT Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com [47.129.242.57]) id QQpbhg19236 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 14:10:36 GMT Received: from zcard307.ca.nortel.com (zcard307.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.67]) by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h7BEAWb25723 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 10:10:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zcard0k6.ca.nortel.com ([47.129.242.158]) by zcard307.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id QBRDX1PB; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 10:10:32 -0400 Received: from nortelnetworks.com (shuklad-2.ca.nortel.com [47.128.34.241]) by zcard0k6.ca.nortel.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id QHBZGRGR; Mon, 11 Aug 2003 10:10:32 -0400 Message-ID: <3F37A3D7.40301@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 10:10:31 -0400 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: Dhirendra Shukla User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@UU.NET Subject: subscribe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit subscribe From owner-mpls@UU.NET Tue Aug 12 12:16:26 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20286 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 12:16:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpblh09791 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:16:27 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpblh08570; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:15:57 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbkz22033 for mpls-outgoing; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:18:39 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbkz22028 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:18:37 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbkz14815 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:18:26 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbkz06185 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:18:25 GMT Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.72]) id QQpbkz06157 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:18:24 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.68.223.137) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Aug 2003 07:18:21 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7CEIDuG008637 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 07:18:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABL72106; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 10:18:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h7CEIC204565 for mpls@uu.net; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 10:18:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpbkz21984 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:17:18 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbkz21988 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:17:11 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbkz04296 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:17:11 GMT Received: from ietf.org by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) id QQpbkz04280 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:17:10 GMT Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA15186; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 10:17:05 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308121417.KAA15186@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: mpls@UU.NET From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-mgmt-overview-08.txt Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 10:17:04 -0400 Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Management Overview Author(s) : T. Nadeau, C. Srinivasan, A. Farrel Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-mgmt-overview-08.txt Pages : 29 Date : 2003-8-12 A range of Management Information Base (MIB) modules has been developed to help model and manage the various aspects of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) networks. These MIB modules are defined in separate documents that focus on the specific areas of responsibility of the modules that they describe. This memo describes the management architecture for MPLS and indicates the inter-relationships between the different MIB modules used for MPLS network management. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-mgmt-overview-08.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-mpls-mgmt-overview-08.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-mgmt-overview-08.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-12095354.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-mgmt-overview-08.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-mgmt-overview-08.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-8-12095354.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Tue Aug 12 12:19:07 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20400 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 12:19:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpblh15363 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:19:11 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpblh14915; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:18:59 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpble17845 for mpls-outgoing; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:38:11 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpble17840 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:37:58 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpble19975 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:36:08 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpble01526 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:36:08 GMT Received: from newdev.harvard.edu by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: newdev.eecs.harvard.edu [140.247.60.212]) id QQpble01516 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:36:07 GMT Received: from newdev.harvard.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by newdev.harvard.edu (8.12.9/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h7CFa49n020633; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 11:36:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from sob@localhost) by newdev.harvard.edu (8.12.9/8.12.2/Submit) id h7CFa4xq020632; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 11:36:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 11:36:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Scott Bradner Message-Id: <200308121536.h7CFa4xq020632@newdev.harvard.edu> To: erosen@cisco.com Subject: Re: draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-01.txt to PS Cc: mpls@UU.NET, swallow@cisco.com In-Reply-To: <200308121530.h7CFUZXw011294@rtp-core-1.cisco.com> Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk > I thought that IANA Considerations are only needed if there are additional > values which IANA may be called upon to assign in the future. such a section is needed whenever the IANA should do something - on the specific document or setup a process for the future - this doc assumes that values will be assigned but does not say specifically that the values should be assigned > Probably I should ask IANA for assignments now, but I'm always reluctant to > do that because they hardly ever respond ;-( Alternatively we could hope > that the RFC editor will get the assignments made by IANA as part of the > pre-publication process. What's our best bet? the normal process is for the RFC Editor to ask the IANA (one of the reasons for the IANA considerations section - so that the need to request is clear) > Scott> I predict that there will be pushback from the security ADs over the > Scott> level of non-detail about how to use IP Sec to secure the links > > What level of detail do you think they will require? at least say something about what IPSec mode and where keys come from (manual would work for me but I'm not a SEC AD) - but this is hard to predict (at least for me) Scott From owner-mpls@UU.NET Tue Aug 12 12:21:30 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20488 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 12:21:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpblh19977 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:21:33 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpblh19666; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:21:22 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpble17528 for mpls-outgoing; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:31:05 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpble17466 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:31:02 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpble10591 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:30:39 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpble25440 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:30:39 GMT Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) id QQpble25435 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:30:38 GMT Received: from cisco.com (64.102.124.12) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Aug 2003 08:36:47 -0700 Received: from cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7CFUZXw011294; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 11:30:35 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308121530.h7CFUZXw011294@rtp-core-1.cisco.com> To: Scott Bradner cc: mpls@UU.NET, swallow@cisco.com, yakov@juniper.net Subject: Re: draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-01.txt to PS In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:17:25 -0400. <200308112017.h7BKHPp8011801@newdev.harvard.edu> Reply-To: erosen@cisco.com User-Agent: EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 11:30:33 -0400 From: Eric Rosen Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Scott> the ID needs to have an IANA Considerations section to tell the IANA Scott> to assign the protocol values X & Y I thought that IANA Considerations are only needed if there are additional values which IANA may be called upon to assign in the future. Probably I should ask IANA for assignments now, but I'm always reluctant to do that because they hardly ever respond ;-( Alternatively we could hope that the RFC editor will get the assignments made by IANA as part of the pre-publication process. What's our best bet? Scott> I predict that there will be pushback from the security ADs over the Scott> level of non-detail about how to use IP Sec to secure the links What level of detail do you think they will require? From owner-mpls@UU.NET Tue Aug 12 12:26:31 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA20649 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 12:26:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpblh27915 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:26:34 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpblh27544; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 16:26:20 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpble17629 for mpls-outgoing; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:34:40 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpble17622 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:34:35 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpble04098 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:31:13 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpble22856 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:31:12 GMT Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) id QQpble22826 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:31:11 GMT Received: from cisco.com (64.102.124.12) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Aug 2003 08:37:20 -0700 Received: from cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7CFV8Xw011410; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 11:31:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308121531.h7CFV8Xw011410@rtp-core-1.cisco.com> To: Mark Duffy cc: George Swallow , Yakov Rekhter , mpls@UU.NET Subject: Re: draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-01.txt to PS In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 11 Aug 2003 15:24:11 -0400. <5.2.0.9.0.20030811152012.01fa4cc0@email> Reply-To: erosen@cisco.com User-Agent: EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 11:31:08 -0400 From: Eric Rosen Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Mark> I sent some comments in response to the previous last call (?) in Mark> April, Oh, that was a last call for accepting it as a WG document, not a last call for sending it to the IESG ;-) Mark> which have not been addressed. My apologies, I meant to incorporate them "in the next rev", but I just dropped the ball ;-( Mark> 1. In section 2 there are protocol numbers 'X' and 'Y' called out. I Mark> presume these are to be replaced with values assigned by IANA. I Mark> don't know what the politics are by which values get assigned or Mark> denied but since the 'Y' value for MPLS multicast "is for further Mark> study" perhaps IANA should only be asked for an 'X' value at this Mark> time. I should think a request for one value is more likely to Mark> succeed than a request for two. I figure if we ask for both, the worst that can happen is that we only get one, but we might as well try for both. On the Tunnel MTU issue, you are correct that the text is confusing. How about: In some cases, the tunnel head receives, for encapsulation, an IP packet, which it first encapsulates in MPLS and then encapsulates in MPLS-in-IP or MPLS-in-GRE. If the source of the IP packet is reachable from the tunnel head, and if the result of this encapsulation would be a packet whose size exceeds the Tunnel MTU, then the value which the tunnel head SHOULD use for the purposes of fragmentation and PMTU discovery outside the tunnel is the Tunnel MTU value minus the size of the MPLS encapsulation. I've incorporated your other corrections. From owner-mpls@UU.NET Tue Aug 12 20:16:52 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA04460 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 20:16:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbmn25820 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 00:16:52 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbmn25441; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 00:16:41 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpblp00380 for mpls-outgoing; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 18:22:02 GMT Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpblp00375 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 18:22:00 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpblp25932 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 18:21:39 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpblp27312 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 18:21:38 GMT Received: from qtech1.quarrytech.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: email.quarrytech.com [4.17.144.4]) id QQpblp27301 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 18:21:38 GMT Received: from MDUFFY1.quarrytech.com (MDUFFY1 [10.1.3.166]) by qtech1.quarrytech.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13) id Q3Z2RPGP; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:21:37 -0400 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20030812140854.00a85430@email.quarrytech.com> X-Sender: mduffy@email.quarrytech.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 14:19:14 -0400 To: erosen@cisco.com From: Mark Duffy Subject: Re: draft-ietf-mpls-in-ip-or-gre-01.txt to PS Cc: George Swallow , Yakov Rekhter , mpls@UU.NET In-Reply-To: <200308121531.h7CFV8Xw011410@rtp-core-1.cisco.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Hi Eric, At 11:31 AM 8/12/2003 -0400, Eric Rosen wrote: >On the Tunnel MTU issue, you are correct that the text is confusing. How >about: > > In some cases, the tunnel head receives, for > encapsulation, an IP packet, which it first encapsulates > in MPLS and then encapsulates in MPLS-in-IP or > MPLS-in-GRE. If the source of the IP packet is > reachable from the tunnel head, and if the result of this > encapsulation I think "this encapsulation" above should be changed to read "the MPLS encapsulation" or the equivalent. "this encapsulation" in this context seems to refer to both the MPLS *and* the MPLS-in-IP/GRE. However, it is only the size of the IP packet plus the MPLS label stack that should be compared to the Tunnel MTU. >would be a packet whose size exceeds the > Tunnel MTU, then the value which the tunnel head SHOULD > use for the purposes of fragmentation and PMTU discovery > outside the tunnel is the Tunnel MTU value minus the > size of the MPLS encapsulation. Thanks, Mark From owner-mpls@UU.NET Wed Aug 13 10:50:12 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA22422 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 10:50:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbot07753 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:50:15 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbot07308; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:50:01 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbor06391 for mpls-outgoing; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:25:09 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbor06365 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:24:54 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbor10921 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:23:24 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbor19530 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:23:23 GMT Received: from rediffmail.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: webmail35.rediffmail.com [203.199.83.246] (may be forged)) id QQpbor19521 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:23:21 GMT Received: (qmail 30232 invoked by uid 510); 13 Aug 2003 14:23:09 -0000 Date: 13 Aug 2003 14:23:09 -0000 Message-ID: <20030813142309.30231.qmail@webmail35.rediffmail.com> Received: from unknown (203.197.138.194) by rediffmail.com via HTTP; 13 aug 2003 14:23:09 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Anu Divya" Reply-To: "Anu Divya" To: "Yakov Rekhter" , kireeti@juniper.net Cc: mpls@UU.NET, dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com Subject: Mismatch in Routing extension and OSPF extension Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Hi, There looks a mismatch between draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-06.txt and draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-09.txt. There is no indication field information in the interface switching capability descriptor for PSC. But section 3.4.2 of Routing extension talks about the standard SDH encoding and Aribitrary SDH encoding for PSC. The fields available in TLV 15 for PSC are Switching cap, Encoding, Max LSP bandwidth at priority, minimum LSP bandwidth, Interface MTU. Encoding types defined in "Generalized MPLS - signaling functional description " includes only one encoding type for SDH.(5 - SDH ITU-T G.707 / SONET ANSI T1.105). So no way we will be able to get the info for PSC from 15 TLV. But we have an indication field in TLV 15 for TDM to specify whether the interface supports Standard or Arbitrary SDH. There is a mismatch between section 3.4 of OSPF extension and 3.4.2 of Routing Extension. Regards, Anu ============================================ Routing Extension 3.4.2. Packet-Switch Capable On a PSC interface that supports Standard SDH encoding, an LSP at priority p could reserve any bandwidth allowed by the branch of the SDH hierarchy, with the leaf and the root of the branch being defined by the Minimum LSP Bandwidth and the Maximum LSP Bandwidth at priority p. On a PSC interface that supports Arbitrary SDH encoding, an LSP at priority p could reserve any bandwidth between the Minimum LSP Bandwidth and the Maximum LSP Bandwidth at priority p, provided that the bandwidth reserved by the LSP is a multiple of the Minimum LSP Bandwidth. ___________________________________________________ Meet your old school or college friends from 1 Million + database... Click here to reunite www.batchmates.com/rediff.asp From owner-mpls@UU.NET Wed Aug 13 11:04:57 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA22736 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 11:04:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbou27383 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:05:00 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbou27182; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:04:52 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbor06257 for mpls-outgoing; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:22:19 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpbor06241 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:22:16 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbor08959 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:19:46 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbor16567 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:19:45 GMT Received: from rediffmail.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: webmail33.rediffmail.com [203.199.83.245] (may be forged)) id QQpbor16539 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 14:19:42 GMT Received: (qmail 27127 invoked by uid 510); 13 Aug 2003 14:19:00 -0000 Date: 13 Aug 2003 14:19:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030813141900.27126.qmail@mailweb33.rediffmail.com> Received: from unknown (203.197.138.194) by rediffmail.com via HTTP; 13 aug 2003 14:19:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Anu Divya" Reply-To: "Anu Divya" To: "Yakov Rekhter" , kireeti@juniper.net Cc: mpls@UU.NET, dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com Subject: Mismatch in Routing extension and OSPF extension Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Hi, There looks a mismatch between draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-06.txt and draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-09.txt. There is no indication field information in the interface switching capability descriptor for PSC. But section 3.4.2 of Routing extension talks about the standard SDH encoding and Aribitrary SDH encoding for PSC. The fields available in TLV 15 for PSC are Switching cap, Encoding, Max LSP bandwidth at priority, minimum LSP bandwidth, Interface MTU. Encoding types defined in "Generalized MPLS - signaling functional description " includes only one encoding type for SDH.(5 - SDH ITU-T G.707 / SONET ANSI T1.105). So no way we will be able to get the info for PSC from 15 TLV. But we have an indication field in TLV 15 for TDM to specify whether the interface supports Standard or Arbitrary SDH. There is a mismatch between section 3.4 of OSPF extension and 3.4.2 of Routing Extension. Regards, Anu ============================================ Routing Extension 3.4.2. Packet-Switch Capable On a PSC interface that supports Standard SDH encoding, an LSP at priority p could reserve any bandwidth allowed by the branch of the SDH hierarchy, with the leaf and the root of the branch being defined by the Minimum LSP Bandwidth and the Maximum LSP Bandwidth at priority p. On a PSC interface that supports Arbitrary SDH encoding, an LSP at priority p could reserve any bandwidth between the Minimum LSP Bandwidth and the Maximum LSP Bandwidth at priority p, provided that the bandwidth reserved by the LSP is a multiple of the Minimum LSP Bandwidth. ___________________________________________________ Meet your old school or college friends from 1 Million + database... Click here to reunite www.batchmates.com/rediff.asp From owner-mpls@UU.NET Wed Aug 13 15:27:36 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA03029 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:27:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbpl15013 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 19:27:37 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbpl14682; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 19:27:29 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbpj15737 for mpls-outgoing; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:47:52 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpbpj15730 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:47:47 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbpj08803 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:47:43 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbpj08678 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:47:42 GMT Received: from maile.telia.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: maile.telia.com [194.22.190.16]) id QQpbpj08647 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:47:39 GMT Received: from d1o888.telia.com (d1o888.telia.com [213.67.172.241]) by maile.telia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7DIlB2r005780; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:47:11 +0200 (CEST) X-Original-Recipient: mpls@UU.NET Received: from pi.se (h45n1fls31o888.telia.com [213.67.172.45]) by d1o888.telia.com (8.10.2p2/8.10.1) with ESMTP id h7DIlAc16646; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:47:10 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <3F3A87AF.7090408@pi.se> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:47:11 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Loa Andersson CC: mpls wg , George Swallow , Bert Wijnen , Alex Zinin Subject: Re: Working group Last Call on base MIBs - correction References: <3F3A5EC2.5040907@pi.se> In-Reply-To: <3F3A5EC2.5040907@pi.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All, the date when the WG Last Call ends should be August 20. /Loa Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > this is to initiate a working group last call. The documents > in the last call are: > > Definitions of Textual Conventions for Multiprotocol Label Switching > (MPLS) Management > > > Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Management Overview > > > Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching > Router (LSR) Management Information Base > > > Definitions of Managed Objects for the Multiprotocol > Label Switching,Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) > > > Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering > ManagementInformation Base > > > Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Forwarding Equivalence > Class ToNext Hop Label Forwarding Entry (FEC-To-NHLFE) > Management Information Base > > > Note: This Working Group Last is for consistentcy between the > MIB modules and changes since last WG Last Call only. > > This Last Call will end on Wednesday 20 September 23.59PM > Swedish time :). > > You will find the same "clickable" information + how we plan to > send it to the IESG to be reviewed for PS/Informational at: > > http://urax.utfors.net/~loa/mpls-mibs.htm > > NOTE: The "Traffic Engineering Link Management Information Base" > > is not part of this working group last call, even though > it is covered in the Overview and referenced on the > web-page above. > Hopefully we will be able to go to working group last call > with thisw draft shortly. > > /Loa > -- Loa Andersson Mobile +46 739 81 21 64 Email loa@pi.se From owner-mpls@UU.NET Wed Aug 13 18:16:55 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA09502 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:16:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbpx22224 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:16:58 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbpx22030; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:16:50 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbox03296 for mpls-outgoing; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:53:50 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpbox03289 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:53:44 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbox16330 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:53:28 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbox24619 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:53:28 GMT Received: from maila.telia.com by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: maila.telia.com [194.22.194.231]) id QQpbox24611 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:53:27 GMT Received: from d1o888.telia.com (d1o888.telia.com [213.67.172.241]) by maila.telia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7DFqYnJ005810; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 17:52:34 +0200 (CEST) X-Original-Recipient: mpls@UU.NET Received: from pi.se (h45n1fls31o888.telia.com [213.67.172.45]) by d1o888.telia.com (8.10.2p2/8.10.1) with ESMTP id h7DFqYc18644; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 17:52:34 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <3F3A5EC2.5040907@pi.se> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 17:52:34 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls wg CC: George Swallow , Bert Wijnen , Alex Zinin Subject: Working group Last Call on base MIBs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Working Group, this is to initiate a working group last call. The documents in the last call are: Definitions of Textual Conventions for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Management Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Management Overview Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR) Management Information Base Definitions of Managed Objects for the Multiprotocol Label Switching,Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering ManagementInformation Base Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Forwarding Equivalence Class ToNext Hop Label Forwarding Entry (FEC-To-NHLFE) Management Information Base Note: This Working Group Last is for consistentcy between the MIB modules and changes since last WG Last Call only. This Last Call will end on Wednesday 20 September 23.59PM Swedish time :). You will find the same "clickable" information + how we plan to send it to the IESG to be reviewed for PS/Informational at: http://urax.utfors.net/~loa/mpls-mibs.htm NOTE: The "Traffic Engineering Link Management Information Base" is not part of this working group last call, even though it is covered in the Overview and referenced on the web-page above. Hopefully we will be able to go to working group last call with thisw draft shortly. /Loa -- Loa Andersson Mobile +46 739 81 21 64 Email loa@pi.se From owner-mpls@UU.NET Wed Aug 13 20:50:03 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA13168 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:50:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbqh28615 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:50:04 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbqh28365; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:49:57 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbpo18414 for mpls-outgoing; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:02:04 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpbpo17981 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:02:00 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) id QQpbpo09840 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:01:03 GMT Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbpo27076 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:01:03 GMT Received: from motgate5.mot.com by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: motgate5.mot.com [144.189.100.105]) id QQpbpo27033 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:01:02 GMT Received: from il06exr06.mot.com (il06exr06.mot.com [129.188.137.136]) by motgate5.mot.com (Motorola/Motgate5) with ESMTP id h7DK10PW015392 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 13:01:01 -0700 (MST) Received: from il06exm06.corp.mot.com (il06exm06.corp.mot.com [10.0.111.6]) by il06exr06.mot.com (Motorola/il06exr06) with ESMTP id h7DK0xI2007844 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:00:59 -0500 Received: by il06exm06.corp.mot.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.2) id ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:00:58 -0500 Message-ID: From: Kullberg Alan-G19424 To: mpls@UU.NET Subject: P2MP problem statement Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:00:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Loa & George, Below is a problem statement for point-to-multipoint using MPLS. This problem statement has been prepared jointly by the authors of the drafts: draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-02.txt draft-raggarwa-mpls-p2mp-te-00.txt Please use this problem statement as a basis to get the MPLS WG charter updated to include P2MP work. Thanks, Alan ######################### Problem statement Content Distribution (CD), Interactive multi-media (IMM), and VPN multicast are applications that are best supported with multicast capabilities. IP Multicast provides P2MP communication. However, there are no Traffic Engineering (TE) capabilities or QoS guarantees with existing IP multicast protocols. Note that diff-serv combined with IP multicast routing is not sufficient for P2MP applications for many of the same reasons that it is not sufficient for unicast applications - TE and CSPF are required to enable and scale the intelligent management of network resources, to prevent congestion, and to enable sub-second rerouting around network failures. One possible solution would be to setup multiple P2P TE LSPs, one to each of the required egress PEs. This requires replicating incoming packets to all the P2P LSPs at the ingress PE to accommodate multipoint communication. This is sub- optimal. It places the replication burden on the ingress PE and hence has very poor scaling characteristics. It also wastes bandwidth resources, memory and MPLS (e.g. label) resources in the network. Hence, to provide TE for a P2MP application in an efficient manner in a large scale environemnt, P2MP TE mechanisms are required. Existing MPLS P2P TE mechanisms have to be enhanced to support P2MP TE LSP setup. We propose that MPLS be enhanced to setup P2MP TE LSPs. This should be achieved without running a multicast routing protocol in the network core and with maximum re-use of the existing MPLS protocols. A P2MP LSP will be setup with TE constraints and will allow efficient packet replication at various branching points in the network. RSVP-TE will be used for setting up a P2MP LSP with enhancements to existing P2P TE LSP procedures. The P2MP TE LSP setup mechanism will include the ability to add/remove receivers to/from an existing P2MP LSP. The MPLS WG will specify only how to setup a P2MP TE LSP. The usage of this will be application dependent. (Milestones) To produce a requirement draft that specifies the scope, requirements, and issues to resolve for this enhancement by Minneapolis 2003 meeting. To produce a small number of solution draft(s) which specify protocol extensions, enhancements and mechanisms to fill the requirement and solve the above problem by spring 2004 IETF meeting. (Example) Consider the following figure. Source 1 (S1) | PE1 | | | | R2----PE3--P1 P2---PE2--Receiver 1 (R1) | PE4----R3 | | R4 Figure 1. The above figure shows PE1, PE2, PE3 and PE4. PE1 is attached to a traffic source that is generating traffic for a P2MP application. PE2, PE3 and PE4 are attached to receivers that are interested in receiving traffic for the application. The following are the objectives that we wish to achieve: a) Set up a P2MP TE LSP from PE1 to PE2, PE3 and PE4. b) Packet replication should be efficient. In this case, the branch node P1 should replicate incoming packets and send them to PE3 and PE4. c) The P2MP TE LSP should be setup by enhancing existing RSVP-TE P2P procedures and without running a multicast routing protocol in the network core. From owner-mpls@UU.NET Wed Aug 13 22:14:18 2003 Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA14542 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 22:14:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbqm13890 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 02:14:21 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbqm13425; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 02:14:01 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbpu26435 for mpls-outgoing; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:36:31 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpbpu26425 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:36:28 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpbpu14694 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:34:22 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbpu09382 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:34:21 GMT Received: from maila.telia.com by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: maila.telia.com [194.22.194.231]) id QQpbpu09309 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:34:17 GMT Received: from d1o888.telia.com (d1o888.telia.com [213.67.172.241]) by maila.telia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7DLYFnJ025977; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 23:34:15 +0200 (CEST) X-Original-Recipient: mpls@UU.NET Received: from pi.se (h45n1fls31o888.telia.com [213.67.172.45]) by d1o888.telia.com (8.10.2p2/8.10.1) with ESMTP id h7DLYEc12652; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 23:34:14 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <3F3AAED7.9030407@pi.se> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 23:34:15 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kullberg Alan-G19424 , mpls@UU.NET Subject: Invitation to discuss: "P2MP problem statement" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alan + both teams, thanks for preparing this! Working Group, below you will find the p2mp problem statement prepared by the autors behind the drafts: draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-02.txt draft-raggarwa-mpls-p2mp-te-00.txt I would like to have your response on 1. the content of the problem statement 2. whether the mpls working group should ask the ADs that a new milestone om p2mp mpls should be added to our charter If there is support we plan to take this as an separate item (not include it in the more general charter update) to the ADs. Again this is a question for which I would like boths the pros and cons to speak up. Silence will not be interpreted (one way or another). /Loa Kullberg Alan-G19424 wrote: > Loa & George, > > Below is a problem statement for point-to-multipoint using MPLS. > This problem statement has been prepared jointly by the authors > of the drafts: > draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-02.txt > draft-raggarwa-mpls-p2mp-te-00.txt > > Please use this problem statement as a basis to get the MPLS WG > charter updated to include P2MP work. > > Thanks, > Alan > > ######################### > > Problem statement > > > Content Distribution (CD), Interactive multi-media (IMM), and VPN multicast > are > applications that are best supported with multicast capabilities. > > IP Multicast provides P2MP communication. However, there are no Traffic > Engineering (TE) capabilities or QoS guarantees with existing IP multicast > protocols. Note that diff-serv combined with IP multicast routing is not > sufficient for P2MP applications for many of the same reasons that it is not > sufficient for unicast applications - TE and CSPF are required to enable and > scale the intelligent management of network resources, to prevent > congestion, and > to enable sub-second rerouting around network failures. > > One possible solution would be to setup multiple P2P TE LSPs, one to each of > the > required egress PEs. This requires replicating incoming packets to all the > P2P > LSPs at the ingress PE to accommodate multipoint communication. This is sub- > optimal. It places the replication burden on the ingress PE and hence has > very > poor scaling characteristics. It also wastes bandwidth resources, memory and > MPLS > (e.g. label) resources in the network. > > Hence, to provide TE for a P2MP application in an efficient manner in a > large > scale environemnt, P2MP TE mechanisms are required. Existing MPLS P2P TE > mechanisms have to be enhanced to support P2MP TE LSP setup. > > We propose that MPLS be enhanced to setup P2MP TE LSPs. This should be > achieved > without running a multicast routing protocol in the network core and with > maximum > re-use of the existing MPLS protocols. A P2MP LSP will be setup with TE > constraints and will allow efficient packet replication at various branching > points in the network. RSVP-TE will be used for setting up a P2MP LSP with > enhancements to existing P2P TE LSP procedures. The P2MP TE LSP setup > mechanism > will include the ability to add/remove receivers to/from an existing P2MP > LSP. > > The MPLS WG will specify only how to setup a P2MP TE LSP. The usage of this > will > be application dependent. > > (Milestones) > > To produce a requirement draft that specifies the scope, requirements, and > issues > to resolve for this enhancement by Minneapolis 2003 meeting. > > To produce a small number of solution draft(s) which specify protocol > extensions, > enhancements and mechanisms to fill the requirement and solve the above > problem > by spring 2004 IETF meeting. > > > > > > > (Example) > > Consider the following figure. > > Source 1 (S1) > | > PE1 > | | > | | > R2----PE3--P1 P2---PE2--Receiver 1 (R1) > | > PE4----R3 > | > | > R4 > > Figure 1. > > The above figure shows PE1, PE2, PE3 and PE4. PE1 is attached to a > traffic > source that is generating traffic for a P2MP application. PE2, PE3 and PE4 > are > attached to receivers that are interested in receiving traffic for the > application. The following are the objectives that we wish to achieve: > > a) Set up a P2MP TE LSP from PE1 to PE2, PE3 and PE4. > b) Packet replication should be efficient. In this case, the branch > node P1 > should replicate incoming packets and send them to PE3 and PE4. > c) The P2MP TE LSP should be setup by enhancing existing RSVP-TE P2P > procedures and without running a multicast routing protocol in the > network core. > > -- Loa Andersson Mobile +46 739 81 21 64 Email loa@pi.se From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 14 09:07:43 2003 Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA08700 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:07:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbse26886 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:07:45 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbse26658; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:07:29 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbsb23365 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:20:47 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpbsb23360 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:20:45 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbsb12365 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:19:38 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbsb07239 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:19:38 GMT Received: from hotmail.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: law12-oe32.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.89]) id QQpbsb07229 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:19:37 GMT Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 05:19:37 -0700 Received: from 218.244.36.158 by law12-oe32.adinternal.hotmail.com with DAV; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:19:36 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [218.244.36.158] X-Originating-Email: [zhangle23@hotmail.com] From: "zhangle" To: "Luca Martini" Cc: Subject: when I create a L2VPN using LDP, May I change the L2 frame header on the ingress? Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 20:17:38 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01C362A1.1B332820" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2003 12:19:37.0166 (UTC) FILETIME=[53F726E0:01C3625E] Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C362A1.1B332820 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SSBoYXZlIGdvdCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIGRyYWZ0czoNCiAgICBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXB3ZTMtY29u dHJvbC1wcm90b2NvbC0wMy50eHQsICAgIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtcHdlMy1ldGhlcm5ldC1lbmNhcC0w My50eHQNCmFuZCBkcmFmdC1tYXJ0aW5pLWwyY2lyY3VpdC10cmFucy1tcGxzLTExLnR4dCwgIGRy YWZ0LW1hcnRpbmktbDJjaXJjdWl0LWVuY2FwLW1wbHMtMDUudHh0DQoNCmJ1dCB0aGUgZHJhZnRz IHNlZW1zIHRvIGJlIGNvbmZsaWN0ZWQuDQoNCndoZW4gSSBjcmVhdGUgYSBMMlZQTiB1c2luZyBM RFAsIE1heSBJIGNoYW5nZSB0aGUgTDIgZnJhbWUgaGVhZGVyIG9uIHRoZSBpbmdyZXNzPw0KdGhl cmUgaXMgc29tZSBkZXNjcmlidGlvbiBiZWxvdzoNCg0KaW4gZHJhZnQtbWFydGluaS1sMmNpcmN1 aXQtdHJhbnMtbXBscy0xMS50eHQsd3JvdGU6DQoNCjMuIFR1bm5lbCBMYWJlbHMgYW5kIFZDIExh YmVscyANCiAgIC4uLlRoZSB0cmFuc3BvcnRlZCBmcmFtZSBNQVkgYmUgbW9kaWZpZWQgd2hlbiBp dCByZWFjaGVzIHRoZSBlZ3Jlc3Mgcm91dGVyLg0KICAgSWYgdGhlIGhlYWRlciBvZiB0aGUgdHJh bnNwb3J0ZWQgbGF5ZXIgMiBmcmFtZSBpcyBtb2RpZmllZCwgdGhpcyBNVVNUDQogICBiZSBkb25l IGF0IHRoZSBlZ3Jlc3MgTFNSIG9ubHkuDQoNCmJ1dCBpbiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXB3ZTMtY29udHJv bC1wcm90b2NvbC0wMy50eHQ6DQo1LjQuIEludGVyZmFjZSBQYXJhbWV0ZXJzIEZpZWxkDQouLi4N Ci0gUmVxdWVzdGVkIFZMQU4gSUQuDQoNCiAgICAgICBBbiBPcHRpb25hbCAxNiBiaXQgdmFsdWUg aW5kaWNhdGluZyB0aGUgcmVxdWVzdGVkIFZMQU4gSUQuIFRoaXMNCiAgICAgICBwYXJhbWV0ZXIg TUFZIGJlIHVzZWQgYnkgYW4gUEUgdGhhdCBpcyBpbmNhcGFibGUgb2YgcmV3cml0aW5nIHRoZQ0K ICAgICAgIDgwMi4xUSBldGhlcm5ldCBWTEFOIHRhZyBvbiBvdXRwdXQuIElmIHRoZSBpbmdyZXNz IFBFIHJlY2VpdmVzDQogICAgICAgdGhpcyByZXF1ZXN0IGl0IE1BWSByZXdyaXRlIHRoZSBWTEFO IElEIHRhZyBpbiBpbnB1dCB0byBtYXRjaCB0aGUNCiAgICAgICByZXF1ZXN0ZWQgVkxBTiBJRC4g SWYgdGhpcyBpcyBub3QgcG9zc2libGUsIGFuZCB0aGUgVkxBTiBJRCBkb2VzDQogICAgICAgbm90 IGFscmVhZHkgbWF0Y2ggY29uZmlndXJlZCBpbmdyZXNzIFZMQU4gSUQgdGhlIFBXIHNob3VsZCBu b3QgYmUNCiAgICAgICBlbmFibGVkLlRoaXMgcGFyYW1ldGVyIGlzIGFwcGxpY2FibGUgb25seSB0 byBQVyB0eXBlIDQuDQoNCmFuZCBpbiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXB3ZTMtZXRoZXJuZXQtZW5jYXAtMDMu dHh0Og0KMy4xLjIuIFJhdyBNb2RlIHZzLiBUYWdnZWQgTW9kZQ0KLi4uDQpJZiBhbiBldGhlcm5l dCBQVyBpcyBvcGVyYXRpbmcgaW4gcmF3IG1vZGUsIHNlcnZpY2UtZGVsaW1pdGluZyB0YWdzDQog ICBhcmUgTkVWRVIgc2VudCBvdmVyIHRoZSBQVy4gIElmIGEgc2VydmljZS1kZWxpbWl0aW5nIHRh ZyBpcyBwcmVzZW50DQogICB3aGVuIHRoZSBmcmFtZSBpcyByZWNlaXZlZCBmcm9tIHRoZSBDRSBi eSB0aGUgUEUsIGl0IE1VU1QgYmUgc3RyaXBwZWQNCiAgIChieSB0aGUgTlNQKSBmcm9tIHRoZSBm cmFtZSBiZWZvcmUgdGhlIGZyYW1lIGlzIHNlbnQgdG8gdGhlIFBXLg0KDQogICBJZiBhbiBldGhl cm5ldCBQVyBpcyBvcGVyYXRpbmcgaW4gdGFnZ2VkIG1vZGUsIGV2ZXJ5IGZyYW1lIHNlbnQgb24N CiAgIHRoZSBQVyBNVVNUIGhhdmUgYSBzZXJ2aWNlLWRlbGltaXRpbmcgVkxBTiB0YWcuICBJZiB0 aGUgZnJhbWUgYXMNCiAgIHJlY2VpdmVkIGJ5IHRoZSBQRSBmcm9tIHRoZSBDRSBkb2VzIG5vdCBo YXZlIGEgc2VydmljZS1kZWxpbWl0aW5nDQogICBWTEFOIHRhZywgdGhlIFBFIG11c3QgcHJlcGVu ZCB0aGUgZnJhbWUgd2l0aCBhIGR1bW15IFZMQU4gdGFnIGJlZm9yZQ0KICAgc2VuZGluZyB0aGUg ZnJhbWUgb24gdGhlIFBXLg0KICAgDQo= ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C362A1.1B332820 Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L0VOIj4NCjxIVE1MPjxIRUFEPg0KPE1FVEEgY29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PWdi MjMxMiIgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj1Db250ZW50LVR5cGU+DQo8TUVUQSBjb250ZW50PSJNU0hUTUwgNS4w MC4yNjE0LjM1MDAiIG5hbWU9R0VORVJBVE9SPg0KPFNUWUxFPjwvU1RZTEU+DQo8L0hFQUQ+DQo8 Qk9EWSBiZ0NvbG9yPSNmZmZmZmY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj5JIGhhdmUgZ290IHRoZSBm b2xsb3dpbmcmbmJzcDtkcmFmdHM6PC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+Jm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IA0KZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1wd2UzLWNvbnRyb2wtcHJvdG9jb2wtMDMudHh0 LCZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyANCmRyYWZ0LWlldGYtcHdlMy1ldGhlcm5ldC1lbmNhcC0wMy50 eHQ8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj5hbmQgZHJhZnQtbWFydGluaS1sMmNp cmN1aXQtdHJhbnMtbXBscy0xMS50eHQsJm5ic3A7IA0KZHJhZnQtbWFydGluaS1sMmNpcmN1aXQt ZW5jYXAtbXBscy0wNS50eHQ8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48 Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+YnV0IHRoZSBkcmFmdHMgc2VlbXMgdG8gYmUgY29uZmxpY3RlZC48L0ZPTlQ+ PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+d2hlbiBJIGNyZWF0 ZSBhIEwyVlBOIHVzaW5nIExEUCwgTWF5IEkgY2hhbmdlIHRoZSBMMiBmcmFtZSANCmhlYWRlciBv biB0aGUgaW5ncmVzcz88L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj50aGVyZSBpcyBz b21lIGRlc2NyaWJ0aW9uIGJlbG93OjwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+DQo8 RElWPjxGT05UIA0Kc2l6ZT0yPmluJm5ic3A7ZHJhZnQtbWFydGluaS1sMmNpcmN1aXQtdHJhbnMt bXBscy0xMS50eHQsd3JvdGU6PC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+ PEZPTlQgY29sb3I9I2ZmMDAwMD48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+My4gVHVubmVsIExhYmVscyBhbmQgVkMg DQpMYWJlbHM8L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBjb2xvcj0jZmYw MDAwIHNpemU9Mj4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgLi4uVGhlIHRyYW5zcG9ydGVkIGZyYW1lIE1BWSBiZSAN Cm1vZGlmaWVkIHdoZW4gaXQgcmVhY2hlcyB0aGUgZWdyZXNzIHJvdXRlci48QlI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5i c3A7IElmIHRoZSBoZWFkZXIgb2YgdGhlIA0KdHJhbnNwb3J0ZWQgbGF5ZXIgMiBmcmFtZSBpcyBt b2RpZmllZCwgdGhpcyBNVVNUPEJSPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyBiZSBkb25lIGF0IHRoZSANCmVncmVz cyBMU1Igb25seS48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBz aXplPTI+YnV0IGluIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtcHdlMy1jb250cm9sLXByb3RvY29sLTAzLnR4dDo8L0ZP TlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj41LjQuIEludGVyZmFjZSBQYXJhbWV0ZXJzIEZp ZWxkPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+Li4uPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJ Vj48Rk9OVCBjb2xvcj0jZmYwMDAwIHNpemU9Mj4tIFJlcXVlc3RlZCBWTEFOIElELjwvRk9OVD48 L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxGT05UIGNvbG9yPSNmZjAwMDAgc2l6ZT0y PiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyBBbiBPcHRpb25hbCANCjE2IGJp dCB2YWx1ZSBpbmRpY2F0aW5nIHRoZSByZXF1ZXN0ZWQgVkxBTiBJRC4gDQpUaGlzPEJSPiZuYnNw OyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyBwYXJhbWV0ZXIgTUFZIGJlIHVzZWQgYnkg YW4gUEUgdGhhdCANCmlzIGluY2FwYWJsZSBvZiByZXdyaXRpbmcgdGhlPEJSPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNw OyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyA4MDIuMVEgDQpldGhlcm5ldCBWTEFOIHRhZyBvbiBv dXRwdXQuIElmIHRoZSBpbmdyZXNzIFBFIA0KcmVjZWl2ZXM8QlI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IHRoaXMgcmVxdWVzdCBpdCBNQVkgcmV3cml0ZSB0aGUgDQpWTEFO IElEIHRhZyBpbiBpbnB1dCB0byBtYXRjaCB0aGU8QlI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IA0KcmVxdWVzdGVkIFZMQU4gSUQuIElmIHRoaXMgaXMgbm90IHBvc3NpYmxl LCBhbmQgdGhlIFZMQU4gSUQgDQpkb2VzPEJSPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw OyZuYnNwOyBub3QgYWxyZWFkeSBtYXRjaCBjb25maWd1cmVkIA0KaW5ncmVzcyBWTEFOIElEIHRo ZSBQVyBzaG91bGQgbm90IGJlPEJSPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw OyANCmVuYWJsZWQuVGhpcyBwYXJhbWV0ZXIgaXMgYXBwbGljYWJsZSBvbmx5IHRvIFBXIHR5cGUg NC48L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+YW5k IGluIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtcHdlMy1ldGhlcm5ldC1lbmNhcC0wMy50eHQ6PC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0K PERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+My4xLjIuIFJhdyBNb2RlIHZzLiBUYWdnZWQgTW9kZTwvRk9OVD48 L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPi4uLjwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgY29s b3I9I2ZmMDAwMCBzaXplPTI+SWYgYW4gZXRoZXJuZXQgUFcgaXMgb3BlcmF0aW5nIGluIHJhdyBt b2RlLCANCnNlcnZpY2UtZGVsaW1pdGluZyB0YWdzPEJSPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyBhcmUgTkVWRVIg c2VudCBvdmVyIHRoZSBQVy4mbmJzcDsgSWYgYSANCnNlcnZpY2UtZGVsaW1pdGluZyB0YWcgaXMg cHJlc2VudDxCUj4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgd2hlbiB0aGUgZnJhbWUgaXMgcmVjZWl2ZWQgDQpmcm9t IHRoZSBDRSBieSB0aGUgUEUsIGl0IE1VU1QgYmUgc3RyaXBwZWQ8QlI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IChi eSB0aGUgTlNQKSBmcm9tIHRoZSANCmZyYW1lIGJlZm9yZSB0aGUgZnJhbWUgaXMgc2VudCB0byB0 aGUgUFcuPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgY29sb3I9 I2ZmMDAwMCBzaXplPTI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IElmIGFuIGV0aGVybmV0IFBXIGlzIG9wZXJhdGlu ZyBpbiANCnRhZ2dlZCBtb2RlLCBldmVyeSBmcmFtZSBzZW50IG9uPEJSPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyB0 aGUgUFcgTVVTVCBoYXZlIGEgDQpzZXJ2aWNlLWRlbGltaXRpbmcgVkxBTiB0YWcuJm5ic3A7IElm IHRoZSBmcmFtZSBhczxCUj4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgcmVjZWl2ZWQgYnkgDQp0aGUgUEUgZnJvbSB0 aGUgQ0UgZG9lcyBub3QgaGF2ZSBhIHNlcnZpY2UtZGVsaW1pdGluZzxCUj4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsg VkxBTiB0YWcsIA0KdGhlIFBFIG11c3QgcHJlcGVuZCB0aGUgZnJhbWUgd2l0aCBhIGR1bW15IFZM QU4gdGFnIGJlZm9yZTxCUj4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgDQpzZW5kaW5nIHRoZSBmcmFtZSBvbiB0aGUg UFcuPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBjb2xvcj0jZmYwMDAwIHNpemU9Mj4mbmJzcDsm bmJzcDsgPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPjwvQk9EWT48L0hUTUw+DQo= ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C362A1.1B332820-- From owner-mpls@UU.NET Thu Aug 14 10:33:59 2003 Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA12352 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 10:33:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbsk01383 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 14:34:01 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbsk01185; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 14:33:52 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbsh20304 for mpls-outgoing; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:53:33 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpbsh20291 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:53:32 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbsh12736 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:53:17 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbsh13306 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:53:17 GMT Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) id QQpbsh13303 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:53:17 GMT Received: from cisco.com (171.68.223.137) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Aug 2003 06:59:53 -0700 Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7EDrDuG005532 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 06:53:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABN46678; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:53:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h7EDrCt24684 for mpls@uu.net; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:53:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.47]) id QQpbqh06043 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:45:24 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr3.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbqh19919 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:45:14 GMT From: m.dubuc@rogers.com Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbqh14571 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:45:14 GMT Received: from fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.86.73]) id QQpbqh14566 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:45:13 GMT Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com (InterMail vM.5.01.05.12 201-253-122-126-112-20020820) with ESMTP id <20030814004513.HCRY6341.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@localhost> for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:45:13 -0400 X-Mailer: Openwave WebEngine, version 2.8.10 (webedge20-101-191-20030113) To: Subject: TE Link MIB Changes Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:45:13 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [127.0.0.1] using ID at Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:45:13 -0400 Message-Id: <20030814004513.HCRY6341.fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@localhost> Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have received mails from an implementor which led me to review more carefully the content of the TE link MIB descriptor tables and the latest drafts (especially draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-09.txt and draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-hierarchy-08.txt). I have concluded that there are deficiencies with some of the TE link tables with regards to support of the Interface Switching Capability descriptors and the support of Forwarding Adjacency. I would like to revisit the TE link MIB and would like to know if there are objections in: - The way the current tables are structured, there can be several interface switching capability descriptor per TE link, but they must all share the same switching capability (only the encoding type can be changed). I propose to remove the teLinkMuxCapability from the teLinkTable and push it down to the teLinkDescriptorTable. - I propose to add rows for maximum LSP bandwidth at priority 0..7 to the teLinkDescriptorTable. - I propose to add the minimum LSP bandwidth, interface MTU and indication rows to the teLinkDescriptor table. Would add some conformance statement to have support for these fields only for PSC/FA (minimum LSP bandwidth and interface MTU) or SONET/SDH (minimum LSP bandwdith and indication). - Remove maximum LSP bandwidth per priority in teLinkBandwidth table. - I propose to remove the componentLinkMuxCapability from the componentLinkTable and push it down to the componentLinkDescriptorTable. - I propose to add rows for maximum LSP bandwidth at priority 0..7 to the componentLinkDescriptorTable. - I propose to add the minimum LSP bandwidth, interface MTU and indication rows to the componentLinkDescriptor table. Would add some conformance statement to have support for these fields only for PSC/FA (minimum LSP bandwidth and interface MTU) or SONET/SDH (minimum LSP bandwdith and indication). - Remove maximum LSP bandwidth per priority in componentLinkBandwidth table. - Add a field in the teLinkTable to assess whether TE link is a FA or not (link to FA-LSP?). If the above is reasonable, I will go ahead with changes. Martin 1 From owner-mpls@UU.NET Fri Aug 15 12:23:42 2003 Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02337 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 12:23:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbwj11224 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 16:23:45 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpbwj10787; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 16:23:23 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpbwf20292 for mpls-outgoing; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:24:23 GMT Received: from imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.11]) id QQpbwf20285 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:24:18 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpbwf12579 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:22:14 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbwf05788 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:22:13 GMT Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-1-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) id QQpbwf05752 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:22:11 GMT Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7FFM8tp022916 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 08:22:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erosen-u10.cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABO41864; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:22:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (erosen@localhost) by erosen-u10.cisco.com (8.11.2/CISCO.WS.1.2) id h7FFM7W04505 for mpls@uu.net; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:22:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpbwf20038 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:21:15 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpbwf24591 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:18:36 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpbwf03247 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:18:35 GMT Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: sj-iport-1-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) id QQpbwf03233 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:18:35 GMT Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7FFIXLH015758; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 08:18:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bifocal.cisco.com (bifocal.cisco.com [161.44.172.150]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ABO41564; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:18:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (swallow@localhost) by bifocal.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) with ESMTP id LAA02363; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:18:32 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200308151518.LAA02363@bifocal.cisco.com> X-Authentication-Warning: bifocal.cisco.com: swallow owned process doing -bs To: mpls@UU.NET Cc: loa@pi.se Subject: LSR Self-test to work group document Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:18:32 -0400 From: George Swallow Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk In Vienna there appeared to be support to make this a WG document. This message is to confirm that. On the advise of Loa, the title will be changed to "Label Switched Router Self-Test". ...George ======================================================================== George Swallow Cisco Systems (978) 936-1398 1414 Massachusetts Avenue Boxborough, MA 01719 From owner-mpls@UU.NET Sun Aug 17 17:45:08 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA21783 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 17:45:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpcep12704 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 21:45:12 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpceo12033; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 21:44:57 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpcek17367 for mpls-outgoing; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:39:51 GMT Received: from imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.46]) id QQpcek17362 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:39:47 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpcek00657 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:38:20 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpcek20304 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:38:19 GMT Received: from mailb.telia.com by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mailb.telia.com [194.22.194.6]) id QQpcek19719 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:37:43 GMT Received: from d1o888.telia.com (d1o888.telia.com [213.67.172.241]) by mailb.telia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7HKbcpe004793; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:37:38 +0200 (CEST) X-Original-Recipient: mpls@uu.net Received: from pi.se (h45n1fls31o888.telia.com [213.67.172.45]) by d1o888.telia.com (8.10.2p2/8.10.1) with ESMTP id h7HKbcc11405; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:37:38 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <3F3FE775.2050307@pi.se> Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 22:37:09 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: George Swallow , mpls@UU.NET Subject: Re: LSR Self-test to work group document References: <200308151518.LAA02363@bifocal.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <200308151518.LAA02363@bifocal.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit George, actually my advice was "Label Switching Router Self-Test" ^^^ ;) to align with the nomenclature from the MPLS Architecture document. /Loa George Swallow wrote: > In Vienna there appeared to be support to make this a WG document. > This message is to confirm that. On the advise of Loa, the title will > be changed to "Label Switched Router Self-Test". > > ...George > > ======================================================================== > George Swallow Cisco Systems (978) 936-1398 > 1414 Massachusetts Avenue > Boxborough, MA 01719 > > > > > -- Loa Andersson Mobile +46 739 81 21 64 Email loa@pi.se From owner-mpls@UU.NET Sun Aug 17 20:04:21 2003 Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.40]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA24474 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 20:04:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpcey18035 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:04:24 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpcey17872; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:04:15 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpcev28935 for mpls-outgoing; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:22:12 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpcev28925 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:22:09 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) id QQpcev14501 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:20:57 GMT Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpcev27877 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:20:56 GMT Received: from relay0.netfirms.com by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: m0.netfirms.com [209.171.43.51]) id QQpcev27871 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2003 23:20:56 GMT Received: (qmail 78014 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2003 23:20:49 -0000 Received: from du-069-0077.access.clara.net (HELO Puppy) (217.158.132.77) by 0 with SMTP; 17 Aug 2003 23:20:49 -0000 Message-ID: <037801c36516$346e36f0$a29c9ed9@Puppy> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "Kullberg Alan-G19424" , "Loa Andersson" Cc: References: <3F3AAED7.9030407@pi.se> Subject: Re: Invitation to discuss: "P2MP problem statement" Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:19:20 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I would like to have your response on > > 1. the content of the problem statement > 2. whether the mpls working group should ask the ADs > that a new milestone om p2mp mpls should be added > to our charter > > If there is support we plan to take this as an separate item > (not include it in the more general charter update) to the > ADs. Again this is a question for which I would like boths > the pros and cons to speak up. Silence will not be interpreted > (one way or another). Loa, I consider point-to-mutlitpoint services to be important in MPLS and GMPLS networks and believe that they should receive attention from the IETF. My question for you (or perhaps for the ADs) is whether this is MPLS or CCAMP work. This is a distinction which is repeatedly fudged and I don't see any clear division of labor between the two WGs. Note that the problem as stated, and the applicability of the solutions is as useful in optical or TDM networks as it is in packet-based MPLS networks. The problem statement is well written and convincing (IMHO) although it only talks about packet traffic. It would be useful if it either distinguished between packet and non-packet traffic (aknowledging that GMPLS signaling may use similar mechnisms in the future) or brought the two together in one problem statement. I think it would be a good idea if the problem statement made an explicit non-goal the computation of p2mp paths and the determination of split points. While the problem statement describes the need to allow the addition of receivers to a p2mp LSP it does not discuss 'leaf initiated join'. I believe this was a feature that was considered useful in ATM and should either be included here or explicitly excluded with a reason. I wonder about the sense of the milestone that says "to produce a small number of solution draft(s)" unless the objective is to produce several for the WG to choose between. We would be well advised to avoid developing alternate solutions that go forward to RFC. Can we not nip this in the bud by puting all the interested parties in a design team together and having them come up with just one solution? Cheers, Adrian From owner-mpls@UU.NET Mon Aug 18 14:52:01 2003 Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.38]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA29273 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 14:52:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpchv15333 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:51:09 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpchu01647; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:42:55 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpchs11352 for mpls-outgoing; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:11:15 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpchs11340 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:11:11 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpchs29733 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:10:50 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpchs05590 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:10:49 GMT Received: from merlot.juniper.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: natint.juniper.net [207.17.136.129]) id QQpchs05584 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 18:10:48 GMT Received: from sapphire.juniper.net (sapphire.juniper.net [172.17.28.108]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h7IIAlu64021; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:10:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rahul@juniper.net) Received: from localhost (rahul@localhost) by sapphire.juniper.net (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h7IIAkB07657; Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:10:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rahul@juniper.net) X-Authentication-Warning: sapphire.juniper.net: rahul owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 11:10:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Rahul Aggarwal To: Adrian Farrel cc: Kullberg Alan-G19424 , Loa Andersson , "" Subject: Re: Invitation to discuss: "P2MP problem statement" In-Reply-To: <037801c36516$346e36f0$a29c9ed9@Puppy> Message-ID: <20030818105923.U5032@sapphire.juniper.net> References: <3F3AAED7.9030407@pi.se> <037801c36516$346e36f0$a29c9ed9@Puppy> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-mpls@UU.NET Precedence: bulk Hi Adrian, Some comments inline: > > the pros and cons to speak up. Silence will not be interpreted > > (one way or another). > > Loa, > > I consider point-to-mutlitpoint services to be important in MPLS and GMPLS networks and > believe that they should receive attention from the IETF. > > My question for you (or perhaps for the ADs) is whether this is MPLS or CCAMP work. This > is a distinction which is repeatedly fudged and I don't see any clear division of labor > between the two WGs. > > Note that the problem as stated, and the applicability of the solutions is as useful in > optical or TDM networks as it is in packet-based MPLS networks. > > The problem statement is well written and convincing (IMHO) although it only talks about > packet traffic. It would be useful if it either distinguished between packet and > non-packet traffic (aknowledging that GMPLS signaling may use similar mechnisms in the > future) or brought the two together in one problem statement. > I think the problem statement should cover both packet and non-packet traffic. We can clarify this in the problem statement. > I think it would be a good idea if the problem statement made an explicit non-goal the > computation of p2mp paths and the determination of split points. > Ok. > While the problem statement describes the need to allow the addition of receivers to a > p2mp LSP it does not discuss 'leaf initiated join'. I believe this was a feature that was > considered useful in ATM and should either be included here or explicitly excluded with a > reason. This is getting into solution details. Leaf initiated join is one possible way of adding receivers to a P2MP LSP. The problem statement was simply trying to capture this requirement. > > I wonder about the sense of the milestone that says "to produce a small number of solution > draft(s)" unless the objective is to produce several for the WG to choose between. We > would be well advised to avoid developing alternate solutions that go forward to RFC. > Can we not nip this in the bud by puting all the interested parties in a design team together > and having them come up with just one solution? > There is collaborative work in progress on a requirements document, that in turn will drive the solutions. Its premature to place boundaries on the solutions before the requirements are well spelled out. This is what the problem statement was trying to capture. Thanks, rahul > Cheers, > Adrian > > From owner-mpls@UU.NET Tue Aug 19 11:28:37 2003 Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net (cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA18173 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:28:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpckz29172 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 15:28:36 GMT Received: from mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.10.50]) id QQpckz27975; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 15:28:03 GMT Received: by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net id QQpckx00253 for mpls-outgoing; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:58:41 GMT Received: from imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net by mail-control.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net [153.39.43.15]) id QQpckx00247 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:58:35 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by imr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net [198.5.241.39]) id QQpckx17841 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:57:52 GMT Received: from cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net by cmr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: localhost [127.0.0.1]) id QQpckx05154 for