From PhillipSpencer@beiduncan.com Fri Feb 1 00:06:18 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3790A3A6813; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 00:06:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 88.162 X-Spam-Level: **************************************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=88.162 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.069, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK=3.116, INVALID_MSGID=1.9, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_RHS_DOB=1.083, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 0.0 STOX_REPLY_TYPE STOX_REPLY_TYPE * 1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 Date: is 6 to 12 hours before Received: date * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: dhumbhar.com] * 10 URIBL_AB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the AB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: dhumbhar.com] * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: dhumbhar.com] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: dhumbhar.com] * 10 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: dhumbhar.com] * 10 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist * [URIs: dhumbhar.com] * 1.1 URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread) * [URIs: dhumbhar.com] * 2.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] * 3.0 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL * [200.93.165.75 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 1.9 INVALID_MSGID Message-Id is not valid, according to RFC 2822 * 3.1 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w9MOx2gqpive; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 00:06:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from medicionesbog01.dicel.com.co (webmail.dicel.com.co [200.93.165.75]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B18BF3A686C; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 00:06:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host42521380.beiduncan.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id LFKYVIS050.113219.gHF.b59.4505737487065 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 03:11:12 +0500 Message-ID: ab0101c864aa$111f21d0$0cca09c1@MedicionesBog01 From: "Doctor Phillip Spencer" To: , " X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4ABA3A6813 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 00:36:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 104.6 X-Spam-Level: **************************************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=104.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DATE_IN_PAST_96_XX=1.69, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, FB_PENIS=1.66, FRT_PENIS1=3.592, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, HELO_EQ_PL=1.135, HOST_EQ_PL=1.95, HTML_MESSAGE=1, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, MANGLED_PENIS=2.3, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, SARE_OBFU_PENIS_SUB=3.333, SUBJECT_FUZZY_PENIS=3.096, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_RHS_DOB=1.083, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 1.9 HOST_EQ_PL HOST_EQ_PL * 1.1 HELO_EQ_PL HELO_EQ_PL * 1.1 HELO_EQ_DSL HELO_EQ_DSL * 3.1 SUBJECT_FUZZY_PENIS Attempt to obfuscate words in Subject: * 3.3 SARE_OBFU_PENIS_SUB subject has obfuscated spammer topic * 1.7 DATE_IN_PAST_96_XX Date: is 96 hours or more before Received: date * 2.3 MANGLED_PENIS BODY: mangled - Penis * 3.6 FRT_PENIS1 BODY: ReplaceTags: Penis * 1.7 FB_PENIS BODY: FB_PENIS * 0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_13 BODY: 1alpha-pock-3alpha * 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: reheesteon.com] * 10 URIBL_AB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the AB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: reheesteon.com] * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: reheesteon.com] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: reheesteon.com] * 10 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: reheesteon.com] * 10 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist * [URIs: reheesteon.com] * 1.1 URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread) * [URIs: reheesteon.com] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [83.4.16.123 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [83.4.16.123 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EeENEqqcrbQ0 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 00:36:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from bxk175.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl (aaaq123.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.4.16.123]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 890153A681E for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 00:36:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000f01c745dc$43c516a0$89161e53@dom962173bebae> From: "domi Siefkes" <_cklewise@BLAUNDRY.COM> To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: ***SPAM*** 104.6 (5) Keep with the times It is now extremely simple and easy to grow your p3nis to unbelievable lengths Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 09:37:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C745E4.A5897EA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080201-0, 2008-02-01), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean ----------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C745E4.A5897EA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Make her tremble with desire with your new huge p3nis ----------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C745E4.A5897EA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Make her tremble with desire with = your new=20 huge p3nis ----------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C745E4.A5897EA0-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 1 01:57:03 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FEA03A68F9; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 01:57:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OcCUAdvrk-fW; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 01:57:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 128913A683D; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 01:57:02 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDE203A683D for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 01:57:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2FcsH2OgdGFQ for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 01:57:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw.testbed.se (smtp.testbed.se [80.86.78.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F5383A680F for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 01:56:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from MailerDaemon by fw.testbed.se with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JKsfH-0001PE-1L for mpls@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:58:31 +0100 Received: from gw.imc.kth.se ([193.10.152.67]:5915 helo=[172.16.2.46]) by fw.testbed.se with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JKsfF-0001P7-KB for mpls@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:58:29 +0100 Message-ID: <47A2ED3A.8010800@pi.se> Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:58:18 +0100 From: Loa Andersson Organization: Acreo AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Subject: [mpls] [Fwd: Internet-Drafts Submission Cutoff Dates for the 71st IETF Meeting in Philadelphia, PA, USA] X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org All, There are two (2) Internet-Draft cutoff dates for the 71st IETF Meeting in Philadelphia, PA, USA: February 18th: Cutoff Date for Initial (i.e., version -00) Internet-Draft Submissions All initial Internet-Drafts (version -00) must be submitted by Monday, February 18th at 9:00 AM ET (14:00 UTC/GMT).The only exception is for version -00 WG drafts that replace existing non-WG drafts. Such drafts may be submitted until the cutoff date for version -01 and higher drafts. As always, all initial submissions with a filename beginning with "draft-ietf" must be approved by the appropriate WG Chair before they can be processed or announced. The Secretariat would appreciate receiving WG Chair approval by Monday, February 11th at 9:00 AM ET (14:00 UTC/GMT). February (14:00 UTC/GMT): Cutoff Date for Revised (i.e., version -01 and higher) Internet-Draft Submissions All revised Internet-Drafts (version -01 and higher) must be submitted by Monday, February 25th at 9:00 AM ET (14:00 UTC/GMT). Initial and revised Internet-Drafts received after their respective cutoff dates will not be made available in the Internet-Drafts directory or announced until on or after Monday, March 10th at 9:00 AM ET (13:00 UTC/GMT), when Internet-Draft posting resumes. Please do not wait until the last minute to submit. The Secretariat encourages you to submit your Internet-Drafts via the Internet-Draft Submission Tool (IDST) https://datatracker.ietf.org/idst/upload.cgi. If you are unable to do so, then you may still submit your Internet- Drafts manually by sending them to internet-drafts@ietf.org. If you are submitting a version -00 WG draft that replaces non-WG draft, then you must submit it manually as the current IDST cannot handle replacements. Please be sure to state that one draft replaces another in the cover note that accompanies your submission. Also, please note that the IDST will not accept drafts submitted after their respective cutoff dates. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. If you have any questions or concerns, then please send a message to internet-drafts@ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat FYI: The Internet-Draft cutoff dates as well as other significant dates for the 71st IETF Meeting can be found at http://www.ietf.org/meetings/71-cutoff_dates.html. _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 1 02:06:05 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 128613A6922; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:06:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PxzYiezSsw8M; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:06:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14DA83A68F2; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:06:04 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B933C3A68EF for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:06:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gJfvc75erysD for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:06:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw.testbed.se (smtp.testbed.se [80.86.78.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E99933A68F2 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:06:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from MailerDaemon by fw.testbed.se with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JKso3-0001Rl-3C for mpls@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Feb 2008 11:07:35 +0100 Received: from gw.imc.kth.se ([193.10.152.67]:1369 helo=[172.16.2.46]) by fw.testbed.se with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JKso0-0001Rf-Qj; Fri, 01 Feb 2008 11:07:32 +0100 Message-ID: <47A2EF5A.7090107@pi.se> Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 11:07:22 +0100 From: Loa Andersson Organization: Acreo AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org, George Swallow , David Ward , Ross Callon X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Subject: [mpls] mpls working group meeting in Philadelphia X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Working Group, there will be an MPLS working group meeting at the Philadelphia IETF meeting. The preliminary agenda for the IETF meeting will be published next Friday, but that won't stop us from starting to put the agenda for the mpls working group together. Please send request for agenda slots to the mpls working group mailing list and/or the working co-chars. Loa and George -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From jr@proactivenet.com Fri Feb 1 02:52:50 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C7743A690B for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:52:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 89.564 X-Spam-Level: **************************************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=89.564 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.697, BAYES_99=3.5, FB_PENIS=1.66, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, FRT_PENIS1=3.592, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.552, HTML_MESSAGE=1, J_CHICKENPOX_31=0.6, MANGLED_ENLARG=2.3, MANGLED_ENLGMN=5, MANGLED_PENIS=2.3, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_FORGED_WROTE=2.523, RCVD_FORGED_WROTE2=4.325, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_NONE=0.1, SARE_ADLTOBFU=0.68, SARE_HTML_A_BODY=0.742, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_RHS_DOB=1.083, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 1.5 FH_RELAY_NODNS We could not determine your Reverse DNS * 4.3 RCVD_FORGED_WROTE2 RCVD_FORGED_WROTE2 * 2.5 RCVD_FORGED_WROTE Forged 'Received' header found ('wrote:' spam) * 2.3 MANGLED_PENIS BODY: mangled - Penis * 0.7 SARE_ADLTOBFU BODY: Contains OBFU adult material * 3.6 FRT_PENIS1 BODY: ReplaceTags: Penis * 5.0 MANGLED_ENLGMN BODY: mangled enlargement * 1.7 FB_PENIS BODY: FB_PENIS * 2.3 MANGLED_ENLARG BODY: mangled enlarge(r|s) * 0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_31 BODY: 3alpha-pock-1alpha * 0.0 NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP URI: Uses a dotted-decimal IP address in URL * 1.6 HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24 BODY: HTML: images with 2000-2400 bytes of words * 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 0.7 SARE_HTML_A_BODY FULL: Message body has very strange HTML sequence * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: domizu.com] * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: domizu.com] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: domizu.com] * 10 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: domizu.com] * 1.1 URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread) * [URIs: domizu.com] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [125.135.66.150 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 0.1 RDNS_NONE Delivered to trusted network by a host with no rDNS * 0.6 HELO_MISMATCH_COM HELO_MISMATCH_COM * 1.7 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zUsTcZK1CAlB for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:52:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from anent.com (unknown [125.135.66.150]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B2A2D3A6880 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 02:52:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from 209.10.202.218 (HELO warpdrive.proactivenet.com) by lists.ietf.org with esmtp (REKWGQUETQ XYAFSY) id abSNSZ-wBNnNu-tX for mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 01 Feb 2008 19:54:21 +0900 Message-ID: <226001c864c0$cd26ce30$7d874296@Scot> From: "Scot Carey" To: "Kirby Stafford" Subject: ***SPAM*** 89.564 (5) Don't be afraid to change your life! Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 19:54:21 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_8798_22C8_01C8650C.3D0E7630" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_8798_22C8_01C8650C.3D0E7630 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In just a few short weeks, you`ll watch with amazement=20 as your phallus grows into the biggest, thickest, hardest, and most power= ful tool=20 you`ve ever imagined - the one you`ve constantly wanted about=20 having! No pen!s en`l@rgement system is faster, easier to use, or=20 more effective than VPXL+ - FOREVER}! VPXL+ IS GUARANTEED TO EN`L@RGE & STRENGTHEN YOUR=20 PHALLUS OR YOUR MONEY BACK - PERIOD! SO WHY WAIT? GET=20 VPXL+ AND LIVE LARGE TODAY! TRY IS TODAY TO SUBSTANTIALLY IMPROVE YOUR MALE PACKAGE IN THIS YEAR! http://domizu=2Ecom/ more modest than other people of great wealth=2E He neither smokedunivers= ity campus=2E He sometimes hailed his own taxicabs, or walkedabroad to st= udy through Soros Foundation scholarships returned to 1984, Soros explained that he was interested in establishing a philanthro= pictrade at Harvard University and economic adviser to the ------=_NextPart_8798_22C8_01C8650C.3D0E7630 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MAXIMIZE YOUR D|K, STRENGTH & PERFORMANCE=

In = just a few short weeks, you`ll watch with amazement as your phallus
grows into the biggest, thickest, hardest, and most powe= rful tool
you`ve ever imagined - the one you`ve constantly wanted abo= ut
having! No pen!s en`l@rgement system is faster, easier to use, or more effective than VPXL+ - FOREVER!

VPXL+ IS GUARANTEED TO EN`L@RGE & STRENGTHEN YOUR
PHALLUS OR YOUR MONEY BA= CK - PERIOD! SO WHY WAIT? GET
VPXL+ AND LIVE LARGE TODAY!

TRY IS TODAY TO SUBSTANTIALLY IMPROVE YOUR MALE PACKA= GE IN THIS YEAR!


bull market and the fall of oil prices=2E The fall of oil = prices could118 Philosophical Speculator
He had the feeling that when = he understood something, it was as if hemore modest than other people of = great wealth=2E He neither smoked
university campus=2E He sometimes ha= iled his own taxicabs, or walkedabroad to study through Soros Foundation = scholarships returned to
1984, Soros explained that he was interested = in establishing a philanthropictrade at Harvard University and economic a= dviser to the ------=_NextPart_8798_22C8_01C8650C.3D0E7630-- From carlos_japa@comsats.net.pk Fri Feb 1 03:05:11 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 544803A68D9 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 03:05:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 24.661 X-Spam-Level: ************************ X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=24.661 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP=1.398, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001, TVD_FINGER_02=2.134, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 1.1 HELO_EQ_DSL HELO_EQ_DSL * 1.4 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP) * 0.0 STOX_REPLY_TYPE STOX_REPLY_TYPE * 2.1 TVD_FINGER_02 TVD_FINGER_02 * 0.0 NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP URI: Uses a dotted-decimal IP address in URL * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: 58.37.128.176] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [213.198.218.44 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 3.0 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL * 2.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] * 0.1 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to trusted network by host with * dynamic-looking rDNS Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IsYhetXcwz4W for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 03:05:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from adsl-218-44.eunet.yu (adsl-218-44.eunet.yu [213.198.218.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 35B213A68FF for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 03:05:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from giuaz ([166.149.97.103]) by adsl-218-44.eunet.yu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:06:31 +0100 Message-ID: <001e01c864c2$80093820$676195a6@giuaz> From: To: Subject: ***SPAM*** 24.661 (5) Wide spectrum of boner enlargers! Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:06:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080201-0, 01.02.2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean what Doctor recommend! http://58.37.128.176/uucjv/ From ducve@adelphia.com Fri Feb 1 03:26:32 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9ED93A6869 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 03:26:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 105.151 X-Spam-Level: **************************************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=105.151 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DATE_IN_FUTURE_12_24=2.189, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_RHS_DOB=1.083, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 0.8 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-d-d * 2.4 HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP addr * 1) * 1.6 FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D Helo is d-d-d-d * 2.2 DATE_IN_FUTURE_12_24 Date: is 12 to 24 hours after Received: date * 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: strutfootlive.com] * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: strutfootlive.com] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: strutfootlive.com] * 10 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: strutfootlive.com] * 10 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist * [URIs: strutfootlive.com] * 1.1 URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread) * [URIs: strutfootlive.com] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [81.156.71.114 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 2.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [81.156.71.114 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 20 URIBL_SBL Contains an URL listed in the SBL blocklist * [URIs: strutfootlive.com] * 2.0 FM_DDDD_TIMES_2 Dual helo + host eq d_d_d_d * 0.1 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to trusted network by host with * dynamic-looking rDNS * 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 53qsV8bgAwyr for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 03:26:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from host81-156-71-114.range81-156.btcentralplus.com (host81-156-71-114.range81-156.btcentralplus.com [81.156.71.114]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 779693A6910 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 03:26:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000901c8658f$022cfc73$d08c2687@groyetbu> From: "federico ting-tin" To: Subject: ***SPAM*** 105.151 (5) 2008 Designer Shoes Collection from Gucci Ugg Prada Chanel Dsquared Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2008 09:43:33 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8658F.0228A42D" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8658F.0228A42D Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable They say first impressions are everything... Make sure you stand your ground when walking around, simply by walking = hard in Top Brand Name Designer Footwear. Forget department store prices, Enjoy DIRECT PRICING at more than 65% = OFF on a wide variety of 2008 Collections from Versace, Prada, Chanel, = Dior & More. =20 We also carry TOP BRANDS such as Uggs, Gucci, Dsquared, D&G, Bally, = Coach and much more. Find Loafers, Boots, High Heels, Sneakers and = Casual Shoes from Brand Names at less than WHOLESALE prices. Selection is available for Women and Men, Shipping is FREE WorldWide, = Trendy Fashion Footwear Sale of the YEAR! Forget Department Store Prices, Buy Direct=20 Visit Today! Click Here.... =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8658F.0228A42D Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

They say first = impressions are everything...
Make sure you stand your ground when walking around, simply by walking = hard in Versace, = Prada, Chanel, Dior & More.

=20 We also carry TOP BRANDS such as Uggs, Gucci, Dsquared, D&G, Bally, = Coach and much more. Find Loafers, Boots, High Heels, Sneakers = and Casual Shoes from Brand Names at less than WHOLESALE prices.
Selection is available for Women and Men, Shipping is FREE WorldWide, = Trendy Fashion Footwear Sale of the YEAR!

Forget Department = Store Prices, Buy Direct
Visit Today! Click Here....
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8658F.0228A42D-- From Dennis-widget@OTVERTKIN.RU Fri Feb 1 04:20:48 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 956C33A6935 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 04:20:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 44.539 X-Spam-Level: ******************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=44.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, RDNS_NONE=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 1.1 HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR HELO using IP Address (not private) * 1.5 FH_RELAY_NODNS We could not determine your Reverse DNS * 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: cutheyts.com] * 0.6 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is a abuseable web server * [217.199.132.9 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: cutheyts.com] * 0.1 RDNS_NONE Delivered to trusted network by a host with no rDNS * 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nrr5yrqRA1f5 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 04:20:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from [217.199.132.9] (unknown [217.199.132.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 337BE3A68A9 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 04:20:46 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000901c864cd$03a5f420$0984c7d9@ServerSM2> From: "Dennis keene" To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: ***SPAM*** 44.539 (5) Chicks will be AMAZED by your legendary PROWESS. Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 13:21:47 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C864D5.656A5C20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 ----------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C864D5.656A5C20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The end to all your frustration lies here - we have the solution to your = woes. ----------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C864D5.656A5C20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The end to all your frustration = lies here -=20 we have the solution to your woes. ----------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C864D5.656A5C20-- From MarcotarnishGoodwin@kidshealth.org Fri Feb 1 05:33:45 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328AB293FAF; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 05:32:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 23.205 X-Spam-Level: *********************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=23.205 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.069, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB=0.888, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK=3.116, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_MLH_Stock7=1.66] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 0.8 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-d-d * 0.9 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_DB Host is d-d-d-d * 1.7 SARE_MLH_Stock7 Various common stock subjects * 1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 Date: is 6 to 12 hours before Received: date * 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 2.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] * 3.0 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL * [70.228.162.226 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 0.1 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to trusted network by host with * dynamic-looking rDNS * 0.3 HOST_MISMATCH_NET HOST_MISMATCH_NET * 0.6 HELO_MISMATCH_COM HELO_MISMATCH_COM * 3.1 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook * 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rtt4ooTcBauP; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 05:32:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from youra1b4a73a80.krausonline.com (70-228-162-226.ded.ameritech.net [70.228.162.226]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 0462429402F; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 05:06:59 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8d8a201c864d3$9152d120$6501a8c0@YOURA1B4A73A80> From: "Geoffrey Potter" To: Subject: ***SPAM*** 23.205 (5) Aggressive investors alert Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 07:08:32 +0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_8D89E_01C864D3.9152D120" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_8D89E_01C864D3.9152D120 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We told you to keep watching, G & S Minerals... Symol : GSML Gold is reaching record of $1000/ oz ... GSML is the undiscovered gem = you should be invested in. Up 4 straight days with record volume If you missed the move from .13 to .17 dont dispair they have not even = scratched the surfact. This company is going to $3.00 So grab yourself some GSML and earn easy 10 bagger ------=_NextPart_000_8D89E_01C864D3.9152D120 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
We told you to keep = watching, G &=20 S Minerals... Symol : GSML

Gold is reaching = record of $1000/=20 oz ... GSML is the undiscovered gem you should be invested=20 in.

Up 4 straight days with = record=20 volume

If you missed the move = from .13 to .17=20 dont dispair they have not even scratched the surfact.

This company is going to=20 $3.00

So grab yourself = some GSML and=20 earn easy 10 bagger

------=_NextPart_000_8D89E_01C864D3.9152D120-- From mailman-bounces@core3.amsl.com Fri Feb 1 05:40:18 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C79DB295E28 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 05:37:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.589 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.589 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.010, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BcJTp1u4Pblo for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 05:37:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EA4928E132 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 05:12:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: ietf.org mailing list memberships reminder From: mailman-owner@ietf.org To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org X-No-Archive: yes Message-ID: Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 05:03:27 -0800 Precedence: bulk X-BeenThere: mailman@core3.amsl.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 List-Id: X-List-Administrivia: yes Sender: mailman-bounces@core3.amsl.com Errors-To: mailman-bounces@core3.amsl.com This is a reminder, sent out once a month, about your ietf.org mailing list memberships. It includes your subscription info and how to use it to change it or unsubscribe from a list. You can visit the URLs to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. In addition to the URL interfaces, you can also use email to make such changes. For more info, send a message to the '-request' address of the list (for example, mailman-request@ietf.org) containing just the word 'help' in the message body, and an email message will be sent to you with instructions. If you have questions, problems, comments, etc, send them to mailman-owner@ietf.org. Thanks! http://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls/mpls-archive%40megatron.ietf.org From mailman-bounces@core3.amsl.com Fri Feb 1 05:42:56 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0985C28DB86 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 05:38:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.589 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.589 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.010, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 71ahvwZFtGFZ for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 05:38:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F077A28E1C5 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 05:13:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: ietf.org mailing list memberships reminder From: mailman-owner@ietf.org To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org X-No-Archive: yes Message-ID: Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 05:03:28 -0800 Precedence: bulk X-BeenThere: mailman@core3.amsl.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 List-Id: X-List-Administrivia: yes Sender: mailman-bounces@core3.amsl.com Errors-To: mailman-bounces@core3.amsl.com This is a reminder, sent out once a month, about your ietf.org mailing list memberships. It includes your subscription info and how to use it to change it or unsubscribe from a list. You can visit the URLs to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. In addition to the URL interfaces, you can also use email to make such changes. For more info, send a message to the '-request' address of the list (for example, mailman-request@ietf.org) containing just the word 'help' in the message body, and an email message will be sent to you with instructions. If you have questions, problems, comments, etc, send them to mailman-owner@ietf.org. Thanks! http://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls/mpls-archive%40megatron.ietf.org From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 1 07:28:10 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 147F428C4E8; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 07:28:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.001 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cyxJjluazeu0; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 07:28:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B5BC3A6BB2; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 07:23:28 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42C803A6BB0 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 07:23:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n8sXkqIPAAfe for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 07:23:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.cpanel.btnaccess.com (ns1.cpanel.btnaccess.com [205.177.121.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4202A28C93B for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 07:17:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from [65.213.193.41] by ns1.cpanel.btnaccess.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JKxfC-0001d0-6E for mpls@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:18:46 -0500 Message-ID: <47A33866.7080209@isocore.com> Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:19:02 -0500 From: Matt Tylenda User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns1.cpanel.btnaccess.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - isocore.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Subject: [mpls] CFP for MPLS2008 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2072141952==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============2072141952== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070400070807060301020503" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070400070807060301020503 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The Call for Presentations (CFP) for MPLS 2008, the 11th event of this conference series, will become available and submissions will be open on officially February 15. You are encouraged to provide input to the CFP topics or submit abstracts in the related field by sending your proposals to mpls2008-cfp@isocore.com . MPLS 2008 will be held October 19 -22 in Washington, DC. Check for more details at www.mpls2008.com . Regards, -- Matt Tylenda mtylenda@isocore.com ISOCORE --------------070400070807060301020503 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The Call for Presentations (CFP) for MPLS 2008, the 11th event of this conference series, will become available and submissions will be open on officially February 15. You are encouraged to provide input to the CFP topics or submit abstracts in the related field by sending your proposals to mpls2008-cfp@isocore.com.

 

MPLS 2008 will be held October 19 -22 in Washington, DC. Check for more details at www.mpls2008.com.

 

Regards,

-- 
Matt Tylenda
mtylenda@isocore.com
ISOCORE
--------------070400070807060301020503-- --===============2072141952== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============2072141952==-- From stamina6@dfbeachlaw.com Fri Feb 1 08:33:30 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5624D3A68F6 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 08:33:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 73.811 X-Spam-Level: **************************************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=73.811 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, GB_H_PHARMACY=1, GB_PHARMACY=1, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, INVALID_DATE=1.245, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001, TRACKER_ID=2.003, TVD_FINGER_02=2.134, TVD_SPACE_RATIO=2.219, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_RHS_DOB=1.083, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 0.3 HELO_EQ_DE HELO_EQ_DE * 1.0 GB_H_PHARMACY I smoke two joints in the morning. * 0.0 STOX_REPLY_TYPE STOX_REPLY_TYPE * 2.1 TVD_FINGER_02 TVD_FINGER_02 * 1.2 INVALID_DATE Invalid Date: header (not RFC 2822) * 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines * 2.0 TRACKER_ID BODY: Incorporates a tracking ID number * 1.0 GB_PHARMACY BODY: I smoke two joints at night. * 2.2 TVD_SPACE_RATIO BODY: TVD_SPACE_RATIO * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: donefelt.com] * 1.1 URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread) * [URIs: donefelt.com] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: donefelt.com] * 10 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: donefelt.com] * 10 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist * [URIs: donefelt.com] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [89.60.186.235 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [89.60.186.235 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 3.0 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL * 2.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xrvcxw18mVGG for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 08:33:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from Ybaeb.y.pppool.de (Ybaeb.y.pppool.de [89.60.186.235]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB8C13A68C7 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 08:33:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from [89.60.186.235] by ; Fri, 32 Jan 2008 17:35:03 +0100 Message-ID: <0600fd74$00000010$ebba3c59@stamina6> From: "James Griffin" To: Subject: ***SPAM*** 73.811 (5) USlicensedWorldwideShippingPharmacy Date: Fri, 32 Jan 2008 17:35:03 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 WorldwideShippingHealthyLifeBestQuality http://donefelt.com From mimi4jephthah@galileo.com Fri Feb 1 09:11:19 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA5D23A67B1 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 09:11:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 98.943 X-Spam-Level: **************************************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=98.943 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, GB_ROLEX=5, HELO_DYNAMIC_DIALIN=3.384, HELO_EQ_DIP_DIALIN=1.573, HOST_EQ_DIP_TDIAL=2.144, PRICES_ARE_AFFORDABLE=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, SARE_SPEC_ROLEX=1.666, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_RHS_DOB=1.083, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 2.1 HOST_EQ_DIP_TDIAL HOST_EQ_DIP_TDIAL * 3.4 HELO_DYNAMIC_DIALIN Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname * (T-Dialin) * 1.6 HELO_EQ_DIP_DIALIN HELO_EQ_DIP_DIALIN * 0.0 PRICES_ARE_AFFORDABLE BODY: Message says that prices aren't too * expensive * 5.0 GB_ROLEX BODY: I don't need a new watch! * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: tankseat.com] * 1.1 URIBL_RHS_DOB Contains an URI of a new domain (Day Old Bread) * [URIs: tankseat.com] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [80.140.240.146 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 2.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] * 10 URIBL_AB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the AB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: tankseat.com] * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: tankseat.com] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: tankseat.com] * 10 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: tankseat.com] * 10 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist * [URIs: tankseat.com] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [80.140.240.146 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 0.1 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to trusted network by host with * dynamic-looking rDNS * 1.7 SARE_SPEC_ROLEX Rolex watch spam * 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ATYKGIZ8Ajky for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 09:11:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from p508CF092.dip.t-dialin.net (p508CF092.dip.t-dialin.net [80.140.240.146]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEADF3A67EA for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 09:11:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000501c864f5$06581f30$6868bd87@kxexer> From: "harland shalom" To: "Malinda Haas" Subject: ***SPAM*** 98.943 (5) exclusive watches, affordable prices rolex Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 15:25:47 +0000 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 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 The finest of luxury timepieces at the LOWEST prices!! http://tankseat.com/ From atessirin@mikropack.de Fri Feb 1 10:07:33 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F4AD3A681A for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 10:07:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 61.034 X-Spam-Level: ************************************************************* X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=61.034 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP=1.398, HELO_EQ_DSL=1.129, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 1.1 HELO_EQ_DSL HELO_EQ_DSL * 1.4 HELO_DYNAMIC_DHCP Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (DHCP) * 0.0 STOX_REPLY_TYPE STOX_REPLY_TYPE * 0.0 NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP URI: Uses a dotted-decimal IP address in URL * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: 76.235.162.131] * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: 76.235.162.131] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: 76.235.162.131] * 10 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist * [URIs: 76.235.162.131] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [62.150.212.15 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 0.1 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to trusted network by host with * dynamic-looking rDNS Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L2Esg6hnsDfx for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 10:07:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from adsl27-15.qualitynet.net (adsl27-15.qualitynet.net [62.150.212.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1B0763A6785 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 10:07:26 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 20341 invoked from network); Fri, 1 Feb 2008 21:08:55 +0300 Received: from unknown (HELO dwegq) (197.58.220.229) by adsl27-15.qualitynet.net with SMTP; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 21:08:55 +0300 Message-ID: <001901c864fd$822bc830$e5dc3ac5@dwegq> From: To: Subject: ***SPAM*** 61.034 (5) A Kiss So Gentle Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 21:08:55 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2499 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2499 Last Night http://76.235.162.131/ From _thimblew@alaerts.com Fri Feb 1 12:15:27 2008 Return-Path: <_thimblew@alaerts.com> X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9502028C1D1 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:15:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 87.628 X-Spam-Level: **************************************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=87.628 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_NONE=0.1, SARE_URI_CONS7=0.306, URIBL_AB_SURBL=10, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10, URI_NOVOWEL=1.62] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 1.1 HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR HELO using IP Address (not private) * 1.5 FH_RELAY_NODNS We could not determine your Reverse DNS * 1.6 URI_NOVOWEL URI: URI hostname has long non-vowel sequence * 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: opbhspsb.com] * 10 URIBL_AB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the AB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: opbhspsb.com] * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: opbhspsb.com] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: opbhspsb.com] * 10 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: opbhspsb.com] * 10 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist * [URIs: opbhspsb.com] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [85.102.62.141 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [85.102.62.141 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 0.1 RDNS_NONE Delivered to trusted network by a host with no rDNS * 0.3 SARE_URI_CONS7 body contains link to probable spammer * 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yJ8cv1d-00Hn for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:15:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [85.101.201.199] (unknown [85.102.62.141]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76ABF3A6976 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:13:44 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000601c8650f$2af40890$c7c96555@hasan> From: "leander Szymczak" <_thimblew@alaerts.com> To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: ***SPAM*** 87.628 (5) Amaze your chick with your new legendary manhood. Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 22:15:19 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C8651F.EE7CD890" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 ----------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C8651F.EE7CD890 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There will be no stopping you after this. Your powers are soon to be = unleashed. ----------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C8651F.EE7CD890 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There will be no stopping you after = this.=20 Your powers are soon to be unleashed. ----------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C8651F.EE7CD890-- From _tfunctie@alexeistudios.com Fri Feb 1 12:29:54 2008 Return-Path: <_tfunctie@alexeistudios.com> X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E8B328C44B for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:29:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 76.302 X-Spam-Level: **************************************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=76.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, HTML_MESSAGE=1, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RDNS_NONE=0.1, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, URIBL_OB_SURBL=10, URIBL_SC_SURBL=10, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 1.1 HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR HELO using IP Address (not private) * 1.5 FH_RELAY_NODNS We could not determine your Reverse DNS * 0.6 J_CHICKENPOX_13 BODY: 1alpha-pock-3alpha * 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: wemsus.com] * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: wemsus.com] * 10 URIBL_JP_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the JP SURBL blocklist * [URIs: wemsus.com] * 10 URIBL_OB_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the OB SURBL blocklist * [URIs: wemsus.com] * 10 URIBL_SC_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the SC SURBL blocklist * [URIs: wemsus.com] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [85.102.62.141 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [85.102.62.141 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 0.1 RDNS_NONE Delivered to trusted network by a host with no rDNS * 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3vFLvnmb5S1U for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:29:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [85.101.201.199] (unknown [85.102.62.141]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3A2C3A6912 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:29:50 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <001001c86511$6ae808a0$c7c96555@hasan> From: "head Melanson" <_tfunctie@alexeistudios.com> To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: ***SPAM*** 76.302 (5) Always wondered how others could have some big d1cks? Here's the answer. Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 22:31:26 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C86522.2E70D8A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 ----------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C86522.2E70D8A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable You can be assured of success by clicking here. ----------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C86522.2E70D8A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable You can be assured of success by = clicking=20 here. ----------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C86522.2E70D8A0-- From VioletprovocationGunter@usmedicalsupplies.com Fri Feb 1 12:53:15 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 678583A699D; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:53:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 24.03 X-Spam-Level: ************************ X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=24.03 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.069, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_VERIZON_P=2.144, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK=3.116, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 2.1 FH_HOST_EQ_VERIZON_P Host is pool-.+verizon.net * 0.8 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-d-d * 1.1 DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 Date: is 6 to 12 hours before Received: date * 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [68.163.251.116 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [68.163.251.116 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 3.0 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL * 2.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] * 0.1 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to trusted network by host with * dynamic-looking rDNS * 0.3 HOST_MISMATCH_NET HOST_MISMATCH_NET * 3.1 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook * 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VcfcH2Y-HrQX; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:53:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from kristen.belkin (pool-68-163-251-116.bos.east.verizon.net [68.163.251.116]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B17A53A6978; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:53:13 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <7f57601c86514$ae817490$0802a8c0@Kristen> From: "Mae Piper" To: Subject: ***SPAM*** 24.03 (5) Next big market winner Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 15:54:30 +0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_7F572_01C86514.AE817490" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_7F572_01C86514.AE817490 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We told you to keep watching, G & S Minerals... Symol : GSML Gold is reaching record of $1000/ oz ... GSML is the undiscovered gem = you should be invested in. Up 4 straight days with record volume If you missed the move from .13 to .17 dont dispair they have not even = scratched the surfact. This company is going to $3.00 So grab yourself some GSML and earn easy 10 bagger ------=_NextPart_000_7F572_01C86514.AE817490 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
We told you to keep = watching, G &=20 S Minerals... Symol : GSML

Gold is reaching = record of $1000/=20 oz ... GSML is the undiscovered gem you should be invested=20 in.

Up 4 straight days with = record=20 volume

If you missed the move = from .13 to .17=20 dont dispair they have not even scratched the surfact.

This company is going to=20 $3.00

So grab yourself = some GSML and=20 earn easy 10 bagger

------=_NextPart_000_7F572_01C86514.AE817490-- From MAILER-DAEMON Sun Feb 3 06:39:35 2008 Return-Path: <> X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AF863A6C73 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 06:39:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.861 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.861 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[ANY_BOUNCE_MESSAGE=0.1, AWL=0.538, BAYES_00=-2.599, VBOUNCE_MESSAGE=0.1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v-alKeN7A9xU for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 06:39:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from omr-d23.mx.aol.com (omr-d23.mx.aol.com [205.188.249.67]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 353573A6B88 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 06:39:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from rly-db06.mx.aol.com (rly-db06.mx.aol.com [205.188.159.211]) by omr-d23.mx.aol.com (v117.7) with ESMTP id MAILOMRD237-7d7547a5d27d2c6; Sun, 03 Feb 2008 09:41:01 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost) by rly-db06.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) id m13Eerxk016732; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 09:41:01 -0500 Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 09:41:01 -0500 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem Message-Id: <200802031441.m13Eerxk016732@rly-db06.mx.aol.com> To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="m13Eerxk016732.1202049661/rly-db06.mx.aol.com" Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) X-AOL-INRLY: nm01omta10.auone-net.jp [211.5.2.79] rly-db06 X-AOL-IP: 205.188.159.211 This is a MIME-encapsulated message --m13Eerxk016732.1202049661/rly-db06.mx.aol.com The original message was received at Sun, 3 Feb 2008 09:40:34 -0500 from nm01omta10.auone-net.jp [211.5.2.79] *** ATTENTION *** Your e-mail is being returned to you because there was a problem with its delivery. The address which was undeliverable is listed in the section labeled: "----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----". The reason your mail is being returned to you is listed in the section labeled: "----- Transcript of Session Follows -----". The line beginning with "<<<" describes the specific reason your e-mail could not be delivered. The next line contains a second error message which is a general translation for other e-mail servers. Please direct further questions regarding this message to your e-mail administrator. --AOL Postmaster ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- (reason: 554 TRANSACTION FAILED - Unrepairable Virus Detected. Your mail has not been sent.) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to air-db09.mail.aol.com.: >>> DATA <<< 554 TRANSACTION FAILED - Unrepairable Virus Detected. Your mail has not been sent. 554 5.0.0 Service unavailable --m13Eerxk016732.1202049661/rly-db06.mx.aol.com Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; rly-db06.mx.aol.com Arrival-Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 09:40:34 -0500 Final-Recipient: RFC822; lecoqclub@aol.com Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Remote-MTA: DNS; air-db09.mail.aol.com Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 554 TRANSACTION FAILED - Unrepairable Virus Detected. Your mail has not been sent. Last-Attempt-Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 09:41:01 -0500 --m13Eerxk016732.1202049661/rly-db06.mx.aol.com Content-Type: text/rfc822-headers Received: from nmomta.auone-net.jp (nm01omta10.auone-net.jp [211.5.2.79]) by rly-db06.mx.aol.com (v121.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDB061-acb47a5d2563e; Sun, 03 Feb 2008 09:40:23 -0500 Received: from ietf.org ([220.217.50.1]) by nm01mta.auone-net.jp id <20080203234021895.MAB9.83F82E0@nm01mta.auone-net.jp>; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 23:40:21 +0900 From: mpls-archive@ietf.org To: lecoqclub@aol.com Subject: RETURNED MAIL: DATA FORMAT ERROR Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 23:38:06 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0004_310840E9.A6E37273" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: <200802031440219162210001MAB9@nm01mta.auone-net.jp> X-AOL-IP: 211.5.2.79 X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE:0:2:312176320:9395240 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: listenair ; SPF_helo : + X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: listenair ; SPF_822_from : - --m13Eerxk016732.1202049661/rly-db06.mx.aol.com-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Feb 3 22:04:10 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 609543A6DC9; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 22:04:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.193 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.193 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.787, HTML_MESSAGE=1, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_1=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_75=0.6, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3Z20KHuypG4Q; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 22:04:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D64D3A6D97; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 22:04:09 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DBB23A6DB4 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 22:04:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CFAun8OhzCU2 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 22:04:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from rediffmail.com (f5mail-237-203.rediffmail.com [202.137.237.203]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E71E63A6BDC for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2008 22:04:04 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 8892 invoked by uid 510); 4 Feb 2008 06:02:48 -0000 Date: 4 Feb 2008 06:02:48 -0000 Message-ID: <20080204060248.8889.qmail@f5mail-237-203.rediffmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 To: , Received: from unknown 203.126.136.220 by rediffmail.com via HTTP; 04 Feb 2008 06:02:48 -0000 From: "anshu " Subject: [mpls] query X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1679387639==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============1679387639== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_bafe4bb25e46ec097bbf603768897b79" --=_bafe4bb25e46ec097bbf603768897b79 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit How is the layer 3 related  decisions are taken at the egress of LSP as the MPLS label does not carry any such information.Thanks and Regards,Anshu --=_bafe4bb25e46ec097bbf603768897b79 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable How is the layer 3 related  decisions are taken at the egress of LSP a= s the MPLS label does not carry any such information.
Thanks and Regar= ds,
Anshu

=3D'HPAIO'
--=_bafe4bb25e46ec097bbf603768897b79-- --===============1679387639== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1679387639==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 4 00:52:00 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F099B3A6DE8; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:51:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.334 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.334 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.333, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=1] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tEFKzQo9REUv; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:51:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 276CE3A6BC3; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:51:59 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 490C93A6B24 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:51:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TbVePBw+SBsb for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:51:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from host301.ipowerweb.com (host301.ipowerweb.com [66.235.211.121]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9156A3A6C46 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 00:51:56 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 47204 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2008 08:53:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO csb18) (121.246.167.63) by host301.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 4 Feb 2008 08:53:29 -0000 Message-ID: <004a01c8670b$cffc78b0$4483a8c0@ceeyes.com> From: "jayakrishna" To: Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 14:26:19 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Subject: [mpls] mpls help X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0912836314==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============0912836314== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0047_01C86739.E8A28160" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C86739.E8A28160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hai all, currently i am developing MPLS for metro-ethernnet switch, i have a = doubt on FEC that is how FEC-label mapping is done for the switch. Thanks Regards Jaya Krishna ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C86739.E8A28160 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
hai all,
currently i am developing MPLS for = metro-ethernnet switch, i have a doubt on FEC that is how FEC-label = mapping=20 is done for the switch.
 
Thanks
Regards
Jaya Krishna
------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C86739.E8A28160-- --===============0912836314== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0912836314==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 4 08:18:02 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA493A6FF7; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:18:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.998 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.277, BAYES_20=-0.74, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.46, HTML_MESSAGE=1, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_1=0.001] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yexPGq66U7ZS; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:18:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1761F3A6FCB; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:18:00 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5E383A6FB4 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:17:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2fES5qet6xRu for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:17:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from enterprise58.opnet.com (enterprise58.opnet.com [192.104.65.21]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC5B93A6FE1 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 08:16:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from wtn12143.opnet.com (wtn12143.opnet.com [172.16.12.143]) by enterprise58.opnet.com (8.13.6/8.12.10) with ESMTP id m14G8K0H000582 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:08:20 -0500 Message-Id: <200802041608.m14G8K0H000582@enterprise58.opnet.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 11:17:36 -0500 To: From: Sachin Kalra In-Reply-To: <20080204060248.8889.qmail@f5mail-237-203.rediffmail.com> References: <20080204060248.8889.qmail@f5mail-237-203.rediffmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-OPNET-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: skalra@opnet.com Subject: Re: [mpls] query X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1227517534==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============1227517534== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_256554015==.ALT" --=====================_256554015==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed By the time packet reaches egress, all the labels have already been stripped off (either PHP or egress popping). Thus, it goes through regular layer 3 processing. - SK At 01:02 AM 2/4/2008, anshu wrote: >How is the layer 3 related decisions are taken at the egress of LSP >as the MPLS label does not carry any such information. >Thanks and Regards, >Anshu > > >HPAIO > >_______________________________________________ >mpls mailing list >mpls@ietf.org >http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --=====================_256554015==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" By the time packet reaches egress, all the labels have already been stripped off (either PHP or egress popping). Thus, it goes through regular layer 3 processing.

- SK
 
At 01:02 AM 2/4/2008, anshu wrote:
How is the layer 3 related  decisions are taken at the egress of LSP as the MPLS label does not carry any such information.
Thanks and Regards,
Anshu

HPAIO
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
--=====================_256554015==.ALT-- --===============1227517534== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1227517534==-- From longgevr@ageku.com Tue Feb 5 10:37:39 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 905083A9925; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:52:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from 86-42-160-200.b-ras1.bbh.dublin.eircom.net (unknown [86.42.160.200]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBBF73A8106 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 19:32:50 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000c01c867a8$04126460$26872a56@kevinscomputer> From: "darshaan klestrovs" To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Life will never be the same again once you click here. Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 03:34:30 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C867A8.04126460" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080204-0, 04/02/2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean ----------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C867A8.04126460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Satisfy your chick's inner desires by clicking here. ----------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C867A8.04126460 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Satisfy your chick's inner desires = by=20 clicking here. ----------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C867A8.04126460-- From JanisvancouverHankins@teachforamerica.org Tue Feb 5 10:38:29 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 7065E3A9018; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:53:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from coolf20733d03b.home (unknown [85.108.36.136]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4EB203A9059; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 01:24:38 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <184001c867d9$24d56c70$0201a8c0@coolf20733d03b> From: "Betsy Hankins" To: Cc: , =20
If you have your own = business and=20 need IMMEDIATE money to spend ANY way you like or require Extra money to = give=20 the business a boost or want A low interest loan - NO STRINGS=20 ATTACHED!
=20
Do not worry about = approval... your=20 credit will not disqualify you!
=20
http://beartc.com.cn/
------=_NextPart_000_183C_01C867D9.24D56C70-- From tribalnqz@mindfulwarrior.com Tue Feb 5 10:47:12 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id C1C683A7331; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:52:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from ppp-124-121-9-211.revip2.asianet.co.th (ppp-124-121-9-211.revip2.asianet.co.th [124.121.9.211]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A6473A7887 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:46:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from [124.121.9.211] by smtp.secureserver.net; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 07:47:55 +0700 Message-ID: <01c867cb$6aed0780$d309797c@tribalnqz> From: "Marva Crain" To: Subject: HealthyLifePharmacyThankYou Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 07:47:55 +0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 PillsForOurCustomersWorldwide http://beganplan.com From chilem-maurers@al-ain.de Tue Feb 5 10:48:43 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id ED8473A75F1; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:37:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [78.52.162.34] (unknown [78.52.160.201]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADBDC28CFF7 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 07:27:27 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <001001c8680b$69ac7d20$22a2344e@gruby123mgkfyg> From: "chilem Licata" To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Incredible, permanant gains on your manhood can be yours, with this simple solution Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 16:26:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C86813.CB6F5E80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 ----------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C86813.CB6F5E80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yesterday, I banged my ex girlfriend, and she was amazed at how large I = was now ----------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C86813.CB6F5E80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yesterday, I banged my ex = girlfriend, and=20 she was amazed at how large I was now ----------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C86813.CB6F5E80-- From ukrainiansshv@fogsendgarden.com Tue Feb 5 10:48:47 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 3DA7E3A6D16; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:38:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from 75-147-72-202-Philadelphia.hfc.comcastbusiness.net (unknown [75.147.72.202]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B7093A6B67 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 14:07:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from [75.147.72.202] by mx1.biz.mail.yahoo.com; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 17:08:38 -0500 Message-ID: <01c86750$954daf00$ca48934b@ukrainiansshv> From: "Wm Paulson" To: Subject: Billing is discrete for our customers privacy. Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 17:08:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01C86750.954DAF00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C86750.954DAF00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable You can expect an increase ranging from 1 to 4 inches in length after a 4= month supply, but we do recommend the 6 month package for better results= and higher savings. We would like to thank John from FL, USA and Dan fro= m Australia for sending us before and after photos and also letting us sh= ow them on our website. http://gieigaevv.com When you are sexually aroused, your brain releases a hormone causing bloo= d to enter the penis and fill your erectile tissue (Corpora Cavernosa). T= he cells in the Corpora Cavernosa are filled with blood until an erection= is achieved. You can have a BIGGER PENIS! ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C86750.954DAF00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
You can expect an increase ranging from = 1 to 4 inches in length after a 4 month supply, but we do recommend the 6= month package for better results and higher savings. We would like to th= ank John from FL, USA and Dan from Australia for sending us before and af= ter photos and also letting us show them on our website.
When you are sexually aroused, your brai= n releases a hormone causing blood to enter the penis and fill your erect= ile tissue (Corpora Cavernosa). The cells in the Corpora Cavernosa are fi= lled with blood until an erection is achieved. You can have a BIGGER PENI= S!
 
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C86750.954DAF00-- From NancyeaveBoggs@safeguardproducts.com Tue Feb 5 10:50:43 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 94C9C3A6940; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:37:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from gatewaysystem.hsd1.ga.comcast.net (c-24-131-59-98.hsd1.ga.comcast.net [24.131.59.98]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E8E8E3A86D1; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 21:47:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from quota by safeguardproducts.com with SMTP id 76r9uOLwfI for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 00:48:28 +0500 From: "Barbara Arroyo" To: Subject: Players from the United States and around the world! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20080205054734.E8E8E3A86D1@mail.ietf.org> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 21:47:34 -0800 (PST) Play your favorite games and get $2400 welcome bonus. Free money free fun. Our safe, secure games will get you smiling when you start seeing dollars pouring in. Relax and have fun with poker, blackjack, roulette, progressive video slots at your own leisure from your couch. http://beartg.cn/ From jr.jvalentine@tyrekamins.com Tue Feb 5 10:50:59 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 9D0E83A79CB; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:53:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from seznam.cz (unknown [78.155.216.13]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 77CDA3A9C30 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 03:47:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from 208.252.236.100 (HELO mail.tyrekamins.com) by lists.ietf.org with esmtp (IAWUWLPCBFJ TNOOB) id 02Yelq-xzYur4-L1 for mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2008 14:50:06 +0300 Message-ID: <23d601c867ed$402cff60$0a0801f1@Jaime> From: "Jaime Cano" To: "Brittney Hathaway" Subject: Try it today and see women fall in love with you all over again. Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 14:50:06 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_9172_243E_01C86806.657A3760" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_9172_243E_01C86806.657A3760 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In just a few short weeks, you`ll watch with amazement=20 as your pen!s grows into the hardest, biggest, ,thickest and most powerfu= l tool=20 you`ve ever imagined - the one you`ve constantly wanted about=20 having! No pen!s en`l@rgement system is faster, easier to use, or=20 more effective than VPXL+ - FOREVER}! VPXL+ IS GUARANTEED TO EN`L@RGE & STRENGTHEN YOUR=20 PEN|S OR YOUR MONEY BACK - PERIOD! SO WHY WAIT? GET=20 VPXL+ AND LIVE LARGE TODAY! CHECK IT OUT NOW TO MAKE YOUR PEN|S BIGGER AND HARDER IN THIS YEAR! http://uiseegge=2Ecom/ replays in all three previous rounds, with two going all1917 - World War = I: British forces led by Sir Stanleygoal down was a shock to United, who = have rarely fallen catch the ball, and he became mixed up with Ferdinand,NICU and Sunnybrook= has created a separate area to ------=_NextPart_9172_243E_01C86806.657A3760 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
#1 DOCTOR RECOMMENDED PEN|S= EN'L@RGEMENT PREPARATION!

In just= a few short weeks,=20 you`ll watch with amazement as your pen!s
grows into the hardest, big= gest, ,thickest and most powerful tool
you`ve ever imagined - the one you`ve constantly wanted about
having!= No pen!s en`l@rgement=20 system is faster, easier to use, or
more effective than VPXL+= - FOREVER!

VPXL+ IS=20 GUARANTEED TO EN`L@RGE & STRENGTHEN YOUR
PE= N|S OR=20 YOUR MONEY BACK - PERIOD! SO WHY WAIT? GET
VPXL+ AND LIVE LARG= E TODAY!

CHECK IT OUT NOW TO MAKE YOUR PEN= |S BIGGER AND HARDER IN THIS YEAR!



responding to antibiotic treatment=2Eker Casillas:
Age: 27replays in all three previous rounds, with two going all
1917 -= World War I: British forces led by Sir Stanleygoal down was a shock to U= nited, who have rarely fallen
catch the ball, and he became mixed up w= ith Ferdinand,NICU and Sunnybrook has created a separate area to ------=_NextPart_9172_243E_01C86806.657A3760-- From cwklg@adelphia.com Tue Feb 5 10:52:13 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 8A3E03A6DC9; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:52:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from 143.113.broadband5.iol.cz (143.113.broadband5.iol.cz [88.100.113.143]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 261523A88F7 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:35:17 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <000801c867c1$02c460ef$0113beaf@fsiqqlb> From: "colet daryl" To: Subject: Get more size for your enjoyment! Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 04:49:21 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C867C1.02C0210F" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C867C1.02C0210F Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =09The meds you need, reliable and hassle free!=20 =09Top products of top brands. Low pricing, discounts, flawless customer = support. =09Millions of customers just can't be wrong! =09thusstill.com =09 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C867C1.02C0210F Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=09

The meds = you need, reliable and hassle free!
=09Top products of top brands. Low pricing, discounts, flawless customer = support.
=20 =09Millions of customers just can't be wrong!

=09 =09
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C867C1.02C0210F-- From octaviat0@bvcmail.com Tue Feb 5 10:53:58 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id C602E3A71F8; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:38:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from [72.54.78.62] (unknown [72.54.78.62]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 434BF3A81CF for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 19:48:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from [72.54.78.62] by smtp.secureserver.net; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:50:02 -0500 Message-ID: <01c86780$46b80900$3e4e3648@octaviat0> From: "Melisa Sams" To: Subject: A larger and more muscular penis is also more of a natural, visual turn on for women. Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:50:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01C86780.46B80900" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C86780.46B80900 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Vpxl stimulates cell growth within the corpora cavernosa itself. An incre= ase in cells allows for more blood to enter the penis making the penis la= rger and the erection more intense. The corpora cavernosa are the two bod= ies of erectile tissue on each side of the penis. Vpxl is 100% natural wi= th no known side effects. All growth is permanent. Over 100,000 Men aroun= d the world are already satisfied with the Quality and Effectiveness of V= pxl and you could be also. A new and more sexually powerful man is only a= few months away. http://blrhspegh.com FACT: In a recent survey by Durex Condoms, 67% of all women admitted that= they are unhappy with their partner's penis size. This proves that size = really does matter. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C86780.46B80900 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Vpxl stimulates cell growth within the c= orpora cavernosa itself. An increase in cells allows for more blood to en= ter the penis making the penis larger and the erection more intense. The = corpora cavernosa are the two bodies of erectile tissue on each side of t= he penis. Vpxl is 100% natural with no known side effects. All growth is = permanent. Over 100,000 Men around the world are already satisfied with t= he Quality and Effectiveness of Vpxl and you could be also. A new and mor= e sexually powerful man is only a few months away.
FACT: In a recent survey by Durex Condom= s, 67% of all women admitted that they are unhappy with their partner's p= enis size. This proves that size really does matter.
 
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C86780.46B80900-- From CarltonhawkinsDaniel@newsday.com Tue Feb 5 10:58:50 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 4FB813A6CB7; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:47:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from userxpdb1413b9.orbitel.net.co (Wimax-c3-ppy-pt-190-70-188-160.orbitel.net.co [190.70.188.160]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D10CF28D5B2; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:46:26 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <0a0801c86816$deaf9fc0$0402a8c0@userxpdb1413b9> From: "Ernesto Valdez" To: , =20
If you have your own = business and=20 want IMMEDIATE cash to spend ANY way you like or require Extra money to = give=20 your company a boost or want A low interest loan - NO STRINGS=20 ATTACHED!
=20
Do not worry about = approval... your=20 your credit report will not disqualify you!
=20
http://beartd.com.cn/
------=_NextPart_000_0A04_01C86816.DEAF9FC0-- From denuding@davidcorio.com Tue Feb 5 10:59:07 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id A07593A730C; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:43:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from p8008-adslbkksp7.C.csloxinfo.net (p8008-adslbkksp7.C.csloxinfo.net [58.136.95.134]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C72228D361 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:09:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [58.136.95.134] by mail.davidcorio.com; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 23:11:29 +0700 Message-ID: <01c8684c$703e6680$865f883a@denuding> From: "Julianne Mejia" To: Subject: Right before your eyes! Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 23:11:29 +0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01C8684C.703E6680" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2905 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2905 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C8684C.703E6680 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Gain 3+ Inches In Length. Increase Your Penis Width (Girth) By upto 20%. = Help Stop Premature Ejaculation! Produce Stronger, Rock Hard Erections. 1= 00% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects. We offer a FULL MONEY BACK GUARAN= TEE if you are not completely satisfied with the results of Vpxl, you hav= e nothing to lose, just a lot to gain! http://blrhspegh.com Fast Shipping WorldWide. Doctor Approved And Recommended. No Pumps! No Su= rgery! No Exercises! Very discrete shipping and billing. 100% Money Back = Guarantee. *3 FREE Bottles Of Vpxl !! Highly secure 128bit order processi= ng. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C8684C.703E6680 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Gain 3+ Inches In Length. Increase Your = Penis Width (Girth) By upto 20%. Help Stop Premature Ejaculation! Produce= Stronger, Rock Hard Erections. 100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects. = We offer a FULL MONEY BACK GUARANTEE if you are not completely satisfied = with the results of Vpxl, you have nothing to lose, just a lot to gain!
Fast Shipping WorldWide. Doctor Approved= And Recommended. No Pumps! No Surgery! No Exercises! Very discrete shipp= ing and billing. 100% Money Back Guarantee. *3 FREE Bottles Of Vpxl !! Hi= ghly secure 128bit order processing.
 
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C8684C.703E6680-- From jutxlkszdis@xlksz.com Tue Feb 5 11:01:13 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 9175C3A80FD; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:38:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from 54.subnet125-163-78.speedy.telkom.net.id (unknown [125.163.78.54]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D93C73A8A78; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 23:08:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from [125.163.78.54] by freemail-g2.xinnetdns.com; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:12:14 +0700 Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:12:14 +0700 From: "Alejandra Enriquez" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.11) Personal Reply-To: jutxlkszdis@xlksz.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <388967999.84551767552470@xlksz.com> To: ldapbis-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Customer alert! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear customer! We let you know, that 3 new messages have been delivered to your private box. Please, check them here: http://foreigngals.info/?idAff=35 Best regards, Administration. From adopted@radiangroupinc.com Tue Feb 5 11:01:53 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id CC7D33A80A5; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:38:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from c-98-199-94-161.hsd1.tx.comcast.net (c-98-199-94-161.hsd1.tx.comcast.net [98.199.94.161]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D086E3A88E6 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:34:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from gbspz ([174.157.187.226]) by c-98-199-94-161.hsd1.tx.comcast.net (8.13.2/8.13.2) with SMTP id m156ajoB078679; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 00:36:45 -0600 Message-ID: <47A8038E.7060203@radiangroupinc.com> Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 00:34:54 -0600 From: User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Your Friend and Lover Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Magic Power Of Love http://68.204.94.163/ From theefoot@azizgroupbd.com Tue Feb 5 11:03:11 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 489573A7C52; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:38:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from eng-fxxf.enginet.ru (unknown [80.67.245.5]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 04F003A7195 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 13:44:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from krwo ([45.229.43.189]) by eng-fxxf.enginet.ru (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id m14Llvf2062929; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 00:47:57 +0300 Message-ID: <002401c86777$45174060$bd2be52d@krwo> From: To: Subject: Do not make a big mistake of being a small-sized looser! Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 00:45:33 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Our experts advise http://aegi.tellthrough.com From ingeniousb7@salesjudge.com Tue Feb 5 11:03:17 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id D73E73A6D15; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:37:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from 51.60.in-addr.arpa.tm.net.my (unknown [60.51.52.218]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ABB73A863C for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 21:33:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from [60.51.52.218] by mx.valueweb.com; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 13:35:09 +0800 Message-ID: <01c867fb$ecf52480$da34333c@ingeniousb7> From: "Zachariah Pierce" To: Subject: CanadianYourHealthWorldwideShipping Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 13:35:09 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="us-ascii"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 AvailableCertifiedAllProducts http://couldarm.com From casandraeji60@fnbhugoton.com Tue Feb 5 11:03:28 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id CAAC43A6D79; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:37:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from h163.28.17.98.ip.alltel.net (h163.28.17.98.ip.alltel.net [98.17.28.163]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 315503A78AD for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:50:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [98.17.28.163] by mail.fnbhugoton.com; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 19:52:13 -0500 Message-ID: <01c86767$6f7fd480$a31c1162@casandraeji60> From: "Melody Matos" To: Subject: AllProductsThankYouWorldwideShipping Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 19:52:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.1830 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1830 CertifiedForValuedCustomerBestsellers http://walkfield.com From ErickapatristicNeff@fldoe.org Tue Feb 5 11:03:56 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@mail.ietf.org Received: by mail.ietf.org (Postfix, from userid 51) id 270D13A6CC7; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:57:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from grandmamma.home (pool-71-184-76-5.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [71.184.76.5]) by mail.ietf.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B7B303A68B5; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 04:01:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <12835a01c867ef$1ebfa560$0201a8c0@Grandmamma> From: "Chandra Mccracken" To: , =20
If you have your own = business and=20 wish IMMEDIATE cash to spend ANY way you like or want Extra money to = give the=20 business a boost or need A low interest loan - NO STRINGS=20 ATTACHED!
=20
Don't worry about = approval... your=20 credit score will not disqualify you!
=20
http://beartc.net.cn/
------=_NextPart_000_128356_01C867EF.1EBFA560-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 6 06:22:09 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44F473A6E3A; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:22:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.989 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.260, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uTQDFNsIg81u; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:22:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C3393A6DF5; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:22:08 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8EEA3A6DF5 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:22:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1UzP-0jwT8VW for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:22:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 884023A6E08 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:22:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from ftrdmel3.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.155]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 6 Feb 2008 15:23:33 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 15:23:32 +0100 Message-ID: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05C92223@ftrdmel3> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-01.txt to WG last call Thread-Index: AchisQt+/a5il84KRGi43z9PnuQCGQGGXRCA References: <20080129195620.9A5F642AA31@SwallowPB.local> From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Feb 2008 14:23:33.0281 (UTC) FILETIME=[DA750110:01C868CB] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-01.txt to WG last call X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org George, Loa, WG, We have updated the draft to take into account the comments received: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt Additional comments are welcomed. Thanks, Regards, Bruno > -----Message d'origine----- > De=A0: George Swallow [mailto:swallow@cisco.com] > Envoy=E9=A0: mardi 29 janvier 2008 20:56 > =C0=A0: DECRAENE Bruno RD-CORE-ISS > Cc=A0: dave.mcdysan@verizon.com; mpls@ietf.org; swallow@cisco.com > Objet=A0: Re: [mpls] draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-01.txt to WG last call > = > Bruno - > = > It seems my call for "is it ready" has turned into a bit of a last call. > Could you update your draft with all the things you've been discussing > over the last month? I'll issue the "official" last call as soon as it > is available. > = > Many thanks, > = > ...George > = > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > George Swallow Cisco Systems (978) 936-1398 > 1414 Massachusetts Avenue > Boxborough, MA 01719 _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 6 07:52:23 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2900E3A6F1B; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 07:52:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2LCQbHgwqsgt; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 07:52:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11C0B3A6E71; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 07:52:22 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EDA63A6E71; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 07:52:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id olQD+BepMIoy; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 07:52:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 638E73A6E09; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 07:52:14 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,312,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="4920623" Received: from ams-dkim-2.cisco.com ([144.254.224.139]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2008 16:53:45 +0100 Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m16Frjuk026601; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 16:53:45 +0100 Received: from stewart-bryants-computer.local (ams3-vpn-dhcp132.cisco.com [10.61.64.132]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m16FreKv006324; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 15:53:40 GMT Message-ID: <47A9D804.20300@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:53:40 +0000 From: Stewart Bryant User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pwe3 , mpls@ietf.org, Mark Townsley , Jari Arkko , Loa Andersson , "George Swallow (swallow)" , Danny McPherson , Ross Callon , David Ward Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-2; header.From=stbryant@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim2001 verified; ); Subject: [mpls] Proposed response to liaison 406 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org We were sent this liaison rather late in the day (9th Jan) an need to get a response back in time for the SG15 meeting next week. In the meantime there have been a whole bunch of higher priority T-MPLS activities that have need priority hence late response. I drew the attention of the liaison to Yaakov Stein to review the TDM material and Luca Martini to review the ATM material and their commments are included verbatim. The concerns about the semi-detailed redefinition of existing texts and corresponding issues of difficulty of presentation and normative reference conflict are mine. Please indicate if I should tone this down. I need to send this out friday evening my time. Regards Stewart Thank you for your liaison of 9th January 2008 entitled "Addition of ATM and PDH clients to T-MPLS " https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/406/ This rather short description of the packet processing is more difficult to read than the descriptions found in either the relevant RFCs or the corresponding Y series recommendations as such we found it difficult to review. Rather than defining the operations in semi-detail we would prefer that you simply indicate the primary references and modes that you propose to support and refer the reader there for the description. This prevents any issue of conflicting definitions. In any case there needs to be a clear indication that this is a subset of existing IETF PWE3 and SG13 recommendations and that their packet processing definitions are authoritative. We are concerned that you only propose to use the structure agnostic TDM mode. This mode has limitations which are addressed by the structure aware modes jointly developed in the IETF PWE3 Working Group and ITU-T SG13. Please can we suggest that you add text explaining that the structure-agnostic mode is not always the idea method of TDM emulation and preferably include text describing the use of the structure aware modes as described in Y.1413, RFC 5086 and RFC 5087. In the case of ATM, please can you be more specific about the exact type of PW that you intend to support. The confusion arises as a result of the text at the end of section 7.1.4 of the document which says: " For the case of Mode 1 * Cell de-multiplexing according to the VPI value, including unmatched VPI cell discard * Remove the VPI field" Since MODE 1 is defined as the N-to-One cell mode of [IETF RFC 4717] , this this text appears to be in error, and we believe that you should call up Mode 2. There are some other items that are unclear in this section. The paper discusses N-1 mode but then discusses multiple VP. Is the mode that you wish to use what we call cell relay mode PW type 0x0003 ? Reagrds etc _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 6 09:07:12 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 129E03A6F45; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 09:07:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.877 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.877 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.372, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NXXX3ePouuXs; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 09:07:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B9B83A6E28; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 09:07:11 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93AE43A6E28 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 09:07:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3ySIIMgOsy8T for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 09:07:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw.testbed.se (smtp.testbed.se [80.86.78.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8098C3A6DFB for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 09:06:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from MailerDaemon by fw.testbed.se with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JMnkd-0002C3-Em for mpls@ietf.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:07:59 +0100 Received: from 62-50-195-203.client.stsn.net ([62.50.195.203]:2431 helo=[10.104.73.223]) by fw.testbed.se with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JMnkb-0002Bu-Ko; Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:07:57 +0100 Message-ID: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:07:51 +0100 From: Loa Andersson Organization: Acreo AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org, George Swallow , Ross Callon , David Ward X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Subject: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Working Group, this is to initiate a working group last call on "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send your comments to the working group mailing list. Loa and George -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 6 12:29:59 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD5F3A7222; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:29:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8KGoloNkAICQ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:29:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40CAE3A7126; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:29:55 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0291A3A7037 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:29:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ws+ihx1DdkF2 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:29:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0CBA3A7126 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:29:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2008 15:31:24 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m16KVOgn015137; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 15:31:24 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m16KVGMX021844; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 20:31:19 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 6 Feb 2008 15:31:16 -0500 Received: from 10.86.104.178 ([10.86.104.178]) by xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 20:30:51 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.6.070618 Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:30:48 -0500 From: JP Vasseur To: Adrian Farrel Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [mpls] working group last callfordraft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps Thread-Index: Acho/ygsZnm6B9TyEdywbQANk8WjQA== In-Reply-To: <044f01c85371$fc0a4340$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Feb 2008 20:31:16.0640 (UTC) FILETIME=[393E6A00:01C868FF] Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last callfordraft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Adrian, > From: Adrian Farrel > Reply-To: Adrian Farrel > Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:17:13 -0000 > To: 'Jean Philippe Vasseur' > Cc: > Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last > callfordraft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps > > Hi, > > I have been very tardy, so none of my notes below should be considered > blocking on my account, nor even a request for a change. Good timing. The current revision addresses all comments received during LC, the next one will take yours into account. See below, > > You may want to consider them for any future revision. > > Cheers, > Adrian > >>> Abstract >>> s/carried onto/carried by/ >>> s/referred to as unconstrained TE LSP/referred to as unconstrained TE >>> LSPs/ > === > Section 2 > > s/Label Switched Path(s) (TE LSP)/Label Switched Paths (TE LSPs)/ > s/assumption about/assumptions about/ > s/(Label Switching Router)/(Label Switching Routers)/ > === Done. > Section 2 > > Unconstrained TE LSPs that are configured and provisioned through a > management system MAY not be included in the count that is reported. > > The use of "MAY not" is ambiguous. People will be unclear whether you > actually mean "MAY NOT". > > I think you want... > > Unconstrained TE LSPs that are configured and provisioned through a > management system MAY be omitted from the count that is reported. Agree, there is no ambiguity with that wording. Changed. > === >>> Section 2 >>> "Furthermore, the knowledge of the number of unconstrained TE LSPs >>> signalled across each link can be used for other purposes (for >>> example to evaluate the number of affected TE LSPs in case of a link >>> failure)." >>> Wouldn't this function be better if we knew the actual number of TE LSPs >>> on a link rather than only the number of zero bandwidth TE LSPs? Since we >>> don't propose an extension that simply counts the number of TE LSPs, >>> perhaps it would be simpler to delete this paragraph. > >> JP> Well for the number of deployed networks with 0-bw TE LSPs used for >> FRR >> purposes, it might still be useful to know the number of 0-bw TE LSPs. > > Then you probably want... > > Furthermore, the knowledge of the number of unconstrained TE LSPs > signalled across each link can be used for other purposes (for > example to evaluate the number of affected unconstrained TE LSPs in > case of a link failure). Done. > === > Section 3 > s/The Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) Sub-TLV is defined/The Unconstrained > TE LSP Count Sub-TLV is defined/ Done. > === > Section 3.2 > s/If a second instance of the Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) sub-TLV is > present/If a second instance of the Unconstrained TE LSP Count Sub-TLV is > present/ Done + also added to the section 3.1 > === >>> Section 6 >>> Is finger really the right protocol to reference for ISIS security? > > Are you still *really* sure you want to reference RFC 1194? Don't you mean > RFC 1195? ;-) Good Catch, Thanks. Cheers. JP. > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 6 12:58:33 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28F653A7126; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:58:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X5ApkeJDLUch; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:58:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E38293A6D5F; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:58:31 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54ADC3A6CA7 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:58:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qpGklKvY0zsL for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:58:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFC983A71CA for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:57:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2008 12:59:24 -0800 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m16KxOAS013084 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:59:24 -0800 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m16Kx0BD029009 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 20:59:24 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 6 Feb 2008 15:59:06 -0500 Received: from 10.86.104.178 ([10.86.104.178]) by xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 20:58:18 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.6.070618 Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:58:17 -0500 From: JP Vasseur To: Message-ID: Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-09.txt Thread-Index: AchpAv8NPYMZZ9T2EdywbQANk8WjQA== In-Reply-To: <20080206204501.46FA03A6E5B@core3.amsl.com> Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Feb 2008 20:59:06.0707 (UTC) FILETIME=[1CAE6A30:01C86903] Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); Subject: [mpls] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-09.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No Change in substance, just minor edits. Thanks. JP. ------ Forwarded Message > From: > Reply-To: > Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 12:45:01 -0800 (PST) > To: > Cc: > Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-09.txt > > 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 : A Link-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic > Engineering Label Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidth across > a link > Author(s) : J. Vasseur, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-09.txt > Pages : 9 > Date : 2008-02-06 > > Several Link-type sub-TLVs have been defined for OSPF and IS-IS in > the context of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic > Engineering (TE) in order to advertise some link characteristics such > as the available bandwidth, traffic engineering metric, > administrative group and so on. By making statistical assumption > about the aggregated traffic carried onto a set of TE Label Switched > Paths (LSPs) signalled with zero bandwith (referred to as > unconstrained TE LSP in this document), and with the knowledge of the > number of unconstrained TE LSPs signalled across a link, algorithms > can be designed to load balance (existing or newly configured) > unconstrained TE LSP across a set of equal cost paths. This requires > knowledge of the number of unconstrained TE LSPs signalled across a > link. This document specifies a new Link-type Traffic Engineering > sub-TLV used to advertise the number of unconstrained TE LSP(s) > signalled across a link. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-09.txt > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of > the message. > You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > to change your subscription settings. > > 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-number-0-bw-te-lsps-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-number-0-bw-te-lsps-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. > Content-Type: text/plain > Content-ID: <2008-02-06124155.I-D\@ietf.org> > > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce ------ End of Forwarded Message _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 7 05:58:00 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD24C3A78AC; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 05:58:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DbAJxoH9FhNw; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 05:57:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F3753A699A; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 05:57:59 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E54C13A7858 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 05:57:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FXP2oO++xrfk for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 05:57:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from exprod7og103.obsmtp.com (exprod7og103.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.159]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 124613A6EE9 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 05:57:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from source ([66.129.224.36]) by exprod7ob103.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 05:58:53 PST Received: from magenta.juniper.net ([172.17.27.123]) by emailsmtp56.jnpr.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 05:58:55 -0800 Received: from juniper.net (sapphire.juniper.net [172.17.28.108]) by magenta.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id m17Dwoq45594; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 05:58:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from yakov@juniper.net) Message-Id: <200802071358.m17Dwoq45594@magenta.juniper.net> To: Loa Andersson In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:07:51 +0100." <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-ID: <2624.1202392730.1@juniper.net> Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 05:58:50 -0800 From: Yakov Rekhter X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Feb 2008 13:58:55.0067 (UTC) FILETIME=[93C932B0:01C86991] Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Ross Callon , David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Loa, > Working Group, > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > your comments to the working group mailing list. Support. Yakov. _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 7 06:18:17 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578663A7893; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:18:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.477 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.477 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.772, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TIETgAcQYQDc; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:18:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C3423A6E3E; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:18:16 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 391513A7640 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:18:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SaUYu4Ctd9M3 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:18:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.16]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BAF83A699A for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 06:18:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from FTRDMEL2.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.153]) by ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 15:19:41 +0100 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 15:19:39 +0100 Message-ID: <8AA97249241F7148BE6D3D8B93D83F5A10776426@ftrdmel2> In-Reply-To: <200802071358.m17Dwoq45594@magenta.juniper.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" Thread-Index: AchpkbElWPBYxdGBSm68E2wAI1g48gAArDPw References: Your message of "Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:07:51 +0100."<47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> <200802071358.m17Dwoq45594@magenta.juniper.net> From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Feb 2008 14:19:41.0638 (UTC) FILETIME=[7ACCD660:01C86994] Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, dward@cisco.com Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org > Working Group, > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.t > xt > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > your comments to the working group mailing list. Support. Christian. _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Feb 10 09:29:47 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2674A3A6821; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:29:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i1vrLaHbdY78; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:29:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BEE43A67F1; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:29:46 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA4D63A67A9 for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:29:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id URf73uv8z8zY for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:29:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from exprod7og108.obsmtp.com (exprod7og108.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.169]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3FCA3A67EA for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:29:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from source ([66.129.224.36]) by exprod7ob108.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:31:11 PST Received: from magenta.juniper.net ([172.17.27.123]) by emailsmtp56.jnpr.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 9 Feb 2008 14:42:36 -0800 Received: from kummer.juniper.net (kummer.juniper.net [172.17.12.90]) by magenta.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id m19MgVq42730; Sat, 9 Feb 2008 14:42:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kireeti@juniper.net) Received: from kummer.juniper.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kummer.juniper.net (8.12.8p1/8.12.3) with ESMTP id m19MgLou082293; Sat, 9 Feb 2008 14:42:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kireeti@juniper.net) Received: from localhost (kireeti@localhost) by kummer.juniper.net (8.12.8p1/8.12.3/Submit) with ESMTP id m19Mg5TG082290; Sat, 9 Feb 2008 14:42:15 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: kummer.juniper.net: kireeti owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 14:42:05 -0800 (PST) From: Kireeti Kompella To: Loa Andersson In-Reply-To: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> Message-ID: <20080209144037.D82281@kummer.juniper.net> References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Feb 2008 22:42:36.0183 (UTC) FILETIME=[110E8270:01C86B6D] Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Ross Callon , David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > your comments to the working group mailing list. support. > Loa and George > > -- > Loa Andersson > > Principal Networking Architect > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > loa@pi.se > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > Kireeti. ------- _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Feb 10 12:18:47 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA10D3A6982; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:18:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_46=0.6] Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qTchvjYbpHTp; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:18:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C6113A68FE; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:15:55 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF0023A6959 for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:15:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kdCpseGjdipL for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:15:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from qb-out-0506.google.com (qb-out-0506.google.com [72.14.204.226]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA0193A68DB for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:15:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by qb-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id o21so7461013qba.9 for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:17:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.158.17 with SMTP id g17mr3131024wfe.127.1202674638006; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:17:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.102.19 with HTTP; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:17:17 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802101217w2707d817p6ee67be533e0f0c2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:17:17 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: "Kireeti Kompella" In-Reply-To: <20080209144037.D82281@kummer.juniper.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> <20080209144037.D82281@kummer.juniper.net> Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Ross Callon , David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I just looked at the document. I find a few issues. The document in the introduction section still talks about Host Address FEC element, even though the same has been removed from RFC5036. The introduction quote seems to be from RFC3036 and not RFC5036. The whole document seems to be written with IPv4 in mind. We talk about /32 prefix etc in the whole document. Check the "Problem Statement" section. The document talks about IGP route leaking and the problems associated with it. However even now in OSPF we already inject all ASBR Router ID's Inter Area (loopback IP address as the Router ID) and the summary information is injected Inter Area(though as summary ASBR LSA and not Summary type-3 LSA) so it is not as much overload as it might seem from the document. We could have used Host Address FEC element in this case, however that has been deprecated. Some typos s/MPLS connectivity (ie an LSP) / MPLS connectivity (i.e. an LSP) / s/reduces the Linkstate database / reduces the link state database / s/distributed in an ordered way.. / distributed in an ordered way./ Thanks, Vishwas On Feb 9, 2008 2:42 PM, Kireeti Kompella wrote: > On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Loa Andersson wrote: > > > Working Group, > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > > your comments to the working group mailing list. > > support. > > > Loa and George > > > > -- > > Loa Andersson > > > > Principal Networking Architect > > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > > loa@pi.se > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > Kireeti. > ------- > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 11 06:17:27 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D48A3A69DC; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:17:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.592 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.592 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.007, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4jYqwN4zT98x; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:17:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 563043A6B9C; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:17:26 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EACC228C928; Sat, 9 Feb 2008 02:38:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s6wInOUhaGoC; Sat, 9 Feb 2008 02:38:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACBED28C944; Sat, 9 Feb 2008 02:37:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from ams-dkim-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.138]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Feb 2008 11:39:09 +0100 Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m19Ad8W4029198; Sat, 9 Feb 2008 11:39:08 +0100 Received: from stewart-bryants-computer.local (ams3-vpn-dhcp110.cisco.com [10.61.64.110]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m19AcYaR022172; Sat, 9 Feb 2008 10:38:35 GMT Message-ID: <47AD82AA.7080600@cisco.com> Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2008 10:38:34 +0000 From: Stewart Bryant User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tsbsg15@itu.int, Malcolm Betts , Greg.Jones@itu.int References: <47A9D804.20300@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <47A9D804.20300@cisco.com> Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-1; header.From=stbryant@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim1002 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:17:24 -0800 Cc: mpls@ietf.org, pwe3 , statements@ietf.org, yoichi.maeda@ntt-at.co.jp, sob@harvard.edurcallon, Danny McPherson , Jari Arkko , David Ward , Ross Callon , Mark Townsley , Stewart Bryant Subject: [mpls] IETF PWE3 WG Response to Addition of ATM and PDH clients to T-MPLS X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org To: tsbsg15@itu.int betts01@nortel.com greg.jones@itu.int CC: sob@harvard.edurcallon dward@cisco.com rcallon@juniper.net mpls@lists.ietf.org jari.arkko@piuha.net townsley@cisco.com mankin@psg.com matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.co.uk pwe3@ietf.org yoichi.maeda@ntt-at.co.jp sjtrowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com swallow@cisco.com loa@pi.se danny@arbor.net stbryant@cisco.com statements@ietf.org For Action by ITU-T SG15 Question 12 IETF PWE3 WG Response to Addition of ATM and PDH clients to T-MPLS Thank you for your liaison of 9th January 2008 entitled "Addition of ATM and PDH clients to T-MPLS" We found this short description of the packet processing more difficult to read than the descriptions found in either the relevant RFCs or the corresponding Y series recommendations as such we found it difficult to review. Rather than defining the operations in semi-detail we would prefer that you simply indicate the primary references and modes that you propose to support and refer the reader there for the description. This prevents any issue of conflicting definitions. In any case there needs to be a clear indication that this is a subset of existing IETF PWE3 and SG13 recommendations and that their packet processing definitions are authoritative. We are concerned that you only propose to use the structure agnostic TDM mode. This mode has limitations which are addressed by the structure aware modes jointly developed in the IETF PWE3 Working Group and ITU-T SG13. Please can we suggest that you add text explaining that the structure-agnostic mode is not always the idea method of TDM emulation and preferably include text describing the use of the structure aware modes as described in Y.1413, RFC 5086 and RFC 5087. In the case of ATM, please can you be more specific about the exact type of PW that you intend to support. The confusion arises as a result of the text at the end of section 7.1.4 of the document which says: " For the case of Mode 1 * Cell de-multiplexing according to the VPI value, including unmatched VPI cell discard * Remove the VPI field" Since MODE 1 is defined as the N-to-One cell mode of [IETF RFC 4717], this this text appears to be in error, and we believe that you should call up Mode 2. There are some other items that are unclear in this section. The paper discusses N-1 mode but then discusses multiple VP. Is the mode that you wish to use what we call cell relay mode PW type 0x0003 ? Regards Stewart Bryant Danny McPherson IETF PWE3 WG Co-chairs _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 11 06:17:32 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B8633A6C5A; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:17:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.533 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.533 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.096, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FKRKtv83pV7N; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:17:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB4703A6BEF; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:17:26 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 365503A6B15; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 03:16:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CF+vqm0bl-kD; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 03:16:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DE893A6B13; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 03:16:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Feb 2008 03:18:02 -0800 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1BBI1VY016994; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 03:18:01 -0800 Received: from stewart-bryants-computer.local (ams3-vpn-dhcp728.cisco.com [10.61.66.216]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m1BBHc61021341; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:17:38 GMT Message-ID: <47B02ED1.8070801@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:17:37 +0000 From: Stewart Bryant User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tsbsg15@itu.int, Ghani.Abbas@ericsson.com Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=stbryant@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:17:24 -0800 Cc: mpls@ietf.org, pwe3 , statements@ietf.org, Jari Arkko , "Scott O. Bradner" , yoichi.maeda@ntt-at.co.jp, Ross Callon , Danny McPherson , David Ward , Mark Townsley , Stewart Bryant Subject: [mpls] PWE3 response to ITU-T SG15Q9 Liaison on TMPLS Ring Protection X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org To: tsbsg15@itu.int ghani.abbas@ericsson.com CC: swallow@cisco.com loa@pi.se adrian@olddog.co.uk dbrungard@att.com danny@arbor.net stbryant@cisco.com sob@harvard.ed rcallon@juniper.net dward@cisco.com mpls@lists.ietf.org jari.arkko@piuha.net townsley@cisco.com mankin@psg.com matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.co.uk pwe3@ietf.org yoichi.maeda@ntt-at.co.jp sjtrowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com ghani.abbas@ericsson.com statements@ietf.org To SG15 Q9 For comment Thank you for your liaison on TMPLS Ring Protection https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/386/ The mechanism proposed in this document is a new type of MPLS packet forwarding technology and as such comes under the purview of the MPLS Change Process (RFC 4929). It should therefore be pursued through the IETF Standards Process. This is a new specialist repair mechanism proposed for a specialist topology. It is clear that the problem could also be solved by the widely deployed repair mechanism based on nested MPLS encapsulation (so called MPLS-TE fast reroute). Please could you point us to information explaining the reasons why this additional mechanism is required. It is our understanding that ring protection requires signaling between the two sides of the failure before the repair can start and that this would seem to be therefore slower than the already deployed mechanism that allows the repairing system to autonomously invoke the repair. We are concerned that unlike existing MPLS fast re-route mechanisms it appears that it is not possible to test the repair path without causing disruption to the operation of the ring. We are concerned that this mechanism will require two labels for every T-MPLS path through the network and hence does not scale as well as an encapsulation based protection. In Section 7 Para 5 the document says: "Hold-off time: to avoid protection switching cascade in different network layers when a lower layer network protection mechanism is activated in conjunction with the T-MPLS layer protection scheme. Usage of hold-off timers allows the lower layer to restore working traffic before the T-MPLS layer initiates a protection action. " Please could you explain how a ring "knows" its current level in the hierarchy in order to set the hold-off timer correctly and what impact this has on the 50ms requirement? In Section 7 para 8 the document says: "a) The switching protocol shall be able to accommodate as a minimum up to 127 nodes on a ring. " It might be better to express this in terms of a reminder that the maximum number of hops that a T-MPLS packet can traverse end to end - including any backtracking needed for repair is 255. In Section 18 Label assignment the document says "In the T-MPLS Shared Protection Ring no restrictions are applied to the labels allocation along the normal and protection connections (besides T-MPLS per platform and per interface label space requirements as described in appendix III/G.8110.1). However, at every node there must be a deterministic relation between the labels assigned for normal and protection connection in both West and East directions. " Please confirm that you mean that it must be possible to associate the normal protection labels, but that the label values may be independently assigned using local policy in the ring nodes. Regards Stewart Bryant IETF PWE3 WG Co-chair _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 11 11:05:51 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DFD13A6DB7; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:05:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.646 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.646 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.209, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9oFH0T4Jfb27; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:05:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55BF63A6D9E; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:05:49 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DFB73A6D58 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:05:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0w+p0+EzoCQ7 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:05:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw.testbed.se (smtp.testbed.se [80.86.78.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 885373A6D92 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:05:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from MailerDaemon by fw.testbed.se with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JOdzX-0001kZ-Q0 for mpls@ietf.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:06:59 +0100 Received: from h4n2fls31o874.telia.com ([213.66.236.4]:62667 helo=[192.168.0.100]) by fw.testbed.se with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JOdzW-0001kQ-Cf; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:06:58 +0100 Message-ID: <47B09CCA.9080100@pi.se> Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:06:50 +0100 From: Loa Andersson Organization: Acreo AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: t-mpls-dt@testbed.se X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Cc: IAB , mpls@ietf.org, pwe3 Subject: [mpls] The IAB Technical Ad Hoc Team on T-MPLS has been closed down X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org To: The IAB Technical Ad Hoc Group on T-MPLS Cc: mpls working group, pwe3 working group Thanks for all the good work and all the hours (that turned out to be much more than what we anticipated) that you all have put into the IAB Technical Ad Hoc Group on T-MPLS. The efforts and diligence of the Ad Hoc group are responsible for our success in promoting MPLS technology as an important part of the IETF standards. Today the ITU-T Ad Hoc Group on T-MPLS was announced in Geneva, and so was the Joint Working Team. This will be followed shortly by an Internet and Routing Area AD sponsored IETF design team. The IAB judges that the Ad hoc team has successfully completed all the tasks is was chartered for and judges that the effort can now conclude. On behalf of the IAB Loa Andersson -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Feb 12 17:46:49 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6FFC28C64A; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:46:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.773 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.773 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.936, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, J_CHICKENPOX_46=0.6, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sJggepw63mLO; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:46:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F01A28C148; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:46:48 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E6328C148 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:46:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zjqr-k8YO99m for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:46:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from el-out-1112.google.com (el-out-1112.google.com [209.85.162.182]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B12928C572 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:46:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by el-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id o28so2218872ele.1 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:48:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.88.20 with SMTP id l20mr1660947wfb.72.1202867289584; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:48:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.102.19 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:48:09 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802121748x63dd9adas64f7870ef1271f07@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:48:09 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com, jeanlouis.leroux@orange-ftgroup.com, ina@juniper.net In-Reply-To: <77ead0ec0802101217w2707d817p6ee67be533e0f0c2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> <20080209144037.D82281@kummer.juniper.net> <77ead0ec0802101217w2707d817p6ee67be533e0f0c2@mail.gmail.com> Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Reforwarding to the authors of the document as I have not got a reply for 3 days Hi, I just looked at the document. I find a few issues. The document in the introduction section still talks about Host Address FEC element, even though the same has been removed from RFC5036. The introduction quote seems to be from RFC3036 and not RFC5036. The whole document seems to be written with IPv4 in mind. We talk about /32 prefix etc in the whole document. Check the "Problem Statement" section. The document talks about IGP route leaking and the problems associated with it. However even now in OSPF we already inject all ASBR Router ID's Inter Area (loopback IP address as the Router ID) and the summary information is injected Inter Area(though as summary ASBR LSA and not Summary type-3 LSA) so it is not as much overload as it might seem from the document. We could have used Host Address FEC element in this case, however that has been deprecated. Some typos s/MPLS connectivity (ie an LSP) / MPLS connectivity (i.e. an LSP) / s/reduces the Linkstate database / reduces the link state database / s/distributed in an ordered way.. / distributed in an ordered way./ Thanks, Vishwas On Feb 9, 2008 2:42 PM, Kireeti Kompella wrote: > On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Loa Andersson wrote: > > > Working Group, > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > > your comments to the working group mailing list. > > support. > > > Loa and George > > > > -- > > Loa Andersson > > > > Principal Networking Architect > > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From JilliansadlerCoulter@roxio.com Tue Feb 12 18:05:58 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0C2A28C648; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:05:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -64.275 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-64.275 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.069, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_LH_HOME=3.714, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_NONE=0.1, SARE_SUB_POOR_CREDIT=1.121, SUBJ_YOUR_DEBT=2.622, URIBL_JP_SURBL=10, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l3s-T-GglBSB; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:05:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from internet09.local.lan (unknown [201.221.148.32]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3BF1028C6D5; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:05:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77a001c86de4$fafcc620$0301a8c0@internet09> From: "Trudy Hager" To: Cc: , , , Subject: erase Your Credit Card Debt Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:05:33 +0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_779C_01C86DE4.FAFCC620" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2663 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2757 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_779C_01C86DE4.FAFCC620 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Join the Thousands of Americans... GETTING OUT OF DEBT! The Professional = Way http://herenowh.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_779C_01C86DE4.FAFCC620 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
Join the Thousands of = Americans...=20 GETTING OUT OF DEBT! The Professional Way
http://herenowh.cn/
------=_NextPart_000_779C_01C86DE4.FAFCC620-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 13 00:38:27 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C218728C6E6; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:38:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.505 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.505 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.018, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, J_CHICKENPOX_46=0.6, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 91zBHsBF13Bw; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:38:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3C473A6F14; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:38:26 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 112A93A6EA7 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:38:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dR4UblaDq6sS for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:38:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A87713A6E9E for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:38:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from ftrdmel3.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.155]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:39:45 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:39:44 +0100 Message-ID: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05CD120B@ftrdmel3> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" Thread-Index: AchsInFY0luw2d1rT+O+zj4CEdJ+6gAagv5w References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> <20080209144037.D82281@kummer.juniper.net> <77ead0ec0802101217w2707d817p6ee67be533e0f0c2@mail.gmail.com> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Feb 2008 08:39:45.0867 (UTC) FILETIME=[FC73A9B0:01C86E1B] Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, dward@cisco.com Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Vishwas, Thanks for your review of the draft and your comments. = > The document in the introduction section still talks about Host > Address FEC element, even though the same has been removed from > RFC5036. > = > The introduction quote seems to be from RFC3036 and not RFC5036. Agreed. Correction done. = > The whole document seems to be written with IPv4 in mind. We talk > about /32 prefix etc in the whole document. Check the "Problem > Statement" section. OK. First occurrence is changed = from: "the exact (/32 for IPv4) loopback addresses" = into: "the specific (e.g. /32 for IPv4) loopback addresses" Others occurrences are changed from "/32" into "specific" Except in the examples section (=A76.1) where the use case is IPv4 only. Is this fine for you or would you prefer an additional sentence stating tha= t the document is also applicable to IPv6? > The document talks about IGP route leaking and the problems associated > with it. However even now in OSPF we already inject all ASBR Router > ID's Inter Area (loopback IP address as the Router ID) and the summary > information is injected Inter Area(though as summary ASBR LSA and not > Summary type-3 LSA) so it is not as much overload as it might seem > from the document. We could have used Host Address FEC element in this > case, however that has been deprecated. From a general standpoint, OSPF can perform route summarization. Detailed O= SPF machinery is network design specific (e.g. the kind of area used such a= s standard/stub/totally stubby...). = In addition, from an IP RIB/FIB perspective, general considerations as to w= hether redistributing specific routes or performing route summarization is = not specific to a routing protocol. The draft reference RFC 2966 which adeq= uately discusses the pros and cons of distributing specific addresses versu= s aggregate ones. = > Some typos > = > s/MPLS connectivity (ie an LSP) / MPLS connectivity (i.e. an LSP) / > s/reduces the Linkstate database / reduces the link state database / > s/distributed in an ordered way.. / distributed in an ordered way./ Done. Thanks, Bruno = > Thanks, > Vishwas > = > On Feb 9, 2008 2:42 PM, Kireeti Kompella wrote: > > On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Loa Andersson wrote: > > > > > Working Group, > > > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > > > > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.= txt > > > > > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > > > your comments to the working group mailing list. > > > > support. > > > > > Loa and George > > > > > > -- > > > Loa Andersson > > > > > > Principal Networking Architect > > > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > > > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > > > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > > > loa@pi.se > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mpls mailing list > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > Kireeti. > > ------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 13 08:19:21 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8445028C93E; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:19:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.518 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DOYXX-ZVkYa8; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:19:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13C6428C911; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:18:43 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0896928C90E for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:18:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YXKAT37Oe-Kv for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:18:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.180]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0363D28C914 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:18:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k40so125691wah.25 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:20:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.115.54.1 with SMTP id g1mr51976wak.132.1202919598141; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:19:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.79.4 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:19:58 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <70452ae70802130819xcba0878g2aa6d11466ed8e4c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:19:58 -0500 From: "Raveendra Torvi" To: mpls@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <70452ae70802130813m45224698n7f052c836940be28@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> <70452ae70802130813m45224698n7f052c836940be28@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [mpls] Fwd: wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0715461962==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============0715461962== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_10910_21455759.1202919598136" ------=_Part_10910_21455759.1202919598136 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Hi, I have couple of points on the section below 7.2. Impact on routing convergence time "The solution documented in this draft reduces the Linkstate database size and the number of FIB entries. However, it does not decrease the number of LFIB entries." [...] Imo, the solution documented in this draft by itself does not reduce the linkstate database and FIB entries, it is reduced by route summarization procedures of IGP, so above text needs rewording. I also want to know author's opinion regarding combining LDP Fec Aggregation idea, so that all the inter-area scalability concerns are addressed comprehensively in one draft, reducing LFIB entries is also very important for MPLS convergence. Ravi. On Feb 6, 2008 12:07 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > your comments to the working group mailing list. > > Loa and George > > -- > Loa Andersson > > Principal Networking Architect > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > loa@pi.se > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > ------=_Part_10910_21455759.1202919598136 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Hi,
I have couple of points on the section below 
7.2. Impact on routing convergence time



"The solution documented in this draft reduces the Linkstate database

   size and the number of FIB entries. However, it does not decrease the


   number of LFIB entries."
[...]
Imo, the solution documented in this draft by itself does not reduce the linkstate database and FIB entries, it is reduced by route summarization procedures of IGP, so above text needs rewording.

I also want to know author's opinion regarding combining LDP Fec Aggregation idea, so that all the inter-area scalability concerns are addressed comprehensively in one draft, reducing LFIB entries is also very important for MPLS convergence.

Ravi.


On Feb 6, 2008 12:07 PM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.se> wrote:
Working Group,

this is to initiate a working group last call on

"LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP"
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt

The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send
your comments to the working group mailing list.

Loa and George

--
Loa Andersson

Principal Networking Architect
Acreo AB                           phone:  +46 8 632 77 14
Isafjordsgatan 22                  mobile: +46 739 81 21 64
Kista, Sweden                      email:  loa.andersson@acreo.se
                                           loa@pi.se
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


------=_Part_10910_21455759.1202919598136-- --===============0715461962== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0715461962==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 13 19:27:35 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9C5828C1FC; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:27:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.733 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.733 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.296, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wpRoEOmGGTZU; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:27:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ECA028C20A; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:27:33 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1173528C20A for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:27:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MdhIOF-Auxrl for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:27:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from el-out-1112.google.com (el-out-1112.google.com [209.85.162.182]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 548F428C1FC for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:27:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by el-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j27so325159elf.25 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:28:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.135.9 with SMTP id i9mr643391wfd.212.1202959731351; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:28:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.102.19 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:28:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802131928s421e8f47t9f19631f598ae9fc@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:28:51 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com In-Reply-To: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05CD120B@ftrdmel3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> <20080209144037.D82281@kummer.juniper.net> <77ead0ec0802101217w2707d817p6ee67be533e0f0c2@mail.gmail.com> <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05CD120B@ftrdmel3> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, dward@cisco.com Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Bruno, Thanks for making all the changes. Instead of specific you could use the term "more specific". > Is this fine for you or would you prefer an additional sentence stating that the > document is also applicable to IPv6? I would say you could actually specify in the beginning that the same mechanism will work for both IPv4 as well as IPv6. The draft looks good otherwise (it does save a few routing entries). However in the case of PE to PE communication like we talk about, we could do things more intelligently by using the summary ASBR route which is anyway propagated in OSPF - (so a direct OSPF to LDP checking instead of the LDP to RIB mapping). This however will work only in case of PE routers (ASBR's) and not general aggregation case. Thanks, Vishwas > > > Thanks, > Bruno > > > > Thanks, > > Vishwas > > > > On Feb 9, 2008 2:42 PM, Kireeti Kompella wrote: > > > On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Loa Andersson wrote: > > > > > > > Working Group, > > > > > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > > > > > > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > > > > > > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > > > > your comments to the working group mailing list. > > > > > > support. > > > > > > > Loa and George > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Loa Andersson > > > > > > > > Principal Networking Architect > > > > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > > > > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > > > > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > > > > loa@pi.se > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > > Kireeti. > > > ------- > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mpls mailing list > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 02:31:41 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9884D3A7071; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:31:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.483 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.483 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.054, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t-oN+iq0wBtV; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:31:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636E53A7062; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:31:40 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DE433A7064 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:31:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KF9oj-xbcGSL for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:31:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from 21ctl.com (pop3.21ctl.com [80.248.7.42]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BFFD3A6F80 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:31:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from [80.248.0.4] (account okesam@21ctl.com) by 21ctl.com (CommuniGate Pro WEBUSER 5.1.5) with HTTP id 7724016 for mpls@ietf.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:25:10 +0100 From: To: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser v5.1.5 Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:25:10 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [mpls] ENQUIRIES X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org i want to know more abot mpls, please can you help me out with sime links? _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 05:22:40 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E07C3A707B; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 05:22:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.358 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.358 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.381, BAYES_40=-0.185, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WdKxX1YSiGsD; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 05:22:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A40A3A707F; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 05:22:39 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 172A13A707F for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 05:22:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qUYgAwY2mkgY for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 05:22:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from bosmailout03.yourhostingaccount.com (3.186.96.66.static.eigbox.net [66.96.186.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D4F13A707C for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 05:22:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from bosmailscan12.eigbox.net ([10.20.15.12]) by bosmailout03.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1JPe4E-0002O5-NY for mpls@ietf.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:23:58 -0500 Received: from bosimpout01.eigbox.net ([10.20.55.1]) by bosmailscan12.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1JPe4E-0000VL-Mk; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:23:58 -0500 Received: from bosauthsmtp11.eigbox.net ([10.20.18.11]) by bosimpout01.eigbox.net with NO UCE id pRPm1Y0020EKspE0000000; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:23:46 -0500 X-EN-OrigOutIP: 10.20.18.11 X-EN-IMPSID: pRPm1Y0020EKspE0000000 Received: from c-24-128-205-249.hsd1.nh.comcast.net ([24.128.205.249] helo=Draconis) by bosauthsmtp11.eigbox.net with esmtpa (Exim) id 1JPe43-0005ay-9z; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:23:47 -0500 From: "Eric Gray" To: Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:23:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: Achu9QPPXxcCH09iRTai+yGgXKWXzQAFqt+Q In-Reply-To: X-EN-UserInfo: 0be385635b7bd38c51b4b39b953d65f3:92c4a8e005d0058653c42e2dce90e8cd X-EN-AuthUser: ewgray@graiymage.com X-EN-OrigIP: 24.128.205.249 X-EN-OrigHost: c-24-128-205-249.hsd1.nh.comcast.net Message-Id: <20080214132237.3D4F13A707C@core3.amsl.com> Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] ENQUIRIES X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Please try any of your favorite Internet search tools. There are more references to MPLS (or Multi Protocol Label Switching) to be easily found that way, than anyone is likely to give you. Of course, you may want to ignore those references that lead you to Minneapolis - which just happens to be abbreviated the same way. We occasionally have meetings there, but otherwise the relationship is only coincidental... -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of okesam@21ctl.com Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 5:25 AM To: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] ENQUIRIES i want to know more abot mpls, please can you help me out with sime links? _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 06:41:46 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 322A928CF56; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:41:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.592 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.592 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.505, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rb1-t7UACOAR; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:41:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6E2528CEE9; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:41:43 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58E1A28CEF9 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:41:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XXwn-6bCHF+V for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:41:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D148728CF1E for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:41:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ftrdmel3.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.155]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:42:57 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:42:56 +0100 Message-ID: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05D117A5@ftrdmel3> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" Thread-Index: AchuublO8B39i1e1RK6NOoeMCwaVKQAXUn+Q References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> <20080209144037.D82281@kummer.juniper.net> <77ead0ec0802101217w2707d817p6ee67be533e0f0c2@mail.gmail.com> <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05CD120B@ftrdmel3> <77ead0ec0802131928s421e8f47t9f19631f598ae9fc@mail.gmail.com> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Feb 2008 14:42:57.0555 (UTC) FILETIME=[E3B91E30:01C86F17] Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, dward@cisco.com Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Vishwas, > Thanks for making all the changes. > > Instead of specific you could use the term "more specific". > > Is this fine for you or would you prefer an additional sentence stating that the > > document is also applicable to IPv6? > I would say you could actually specify in the beginning that the same > mechanism will work for both IPv4 as well as IPv6. Done. Added: "It is applicable to IPv4 and IPv6 prefix FEC elements (addresses families 1 and 2 as per [ASSIGNED_AF])." (In section 5 "Label Mapping Procedure", following "This document defines a new label mapping procedure for [LDP].") > The draft looks good otherwise (it does save a few routing entries). > However in the case of PE to PE communication like we talk about, we > could do things more intelligently by using the summary ASBR route > which is anyway propagated in OSPF - (so a direct OSPF to LDP checking > instead of the LDP to RIB mapping). This however will work only in > case of PE routers (ASBR's) and not general aggregation case. Besides, this would be specific to OSPF whereas currently LDP is not. Thanks, Bruno > Thanks, > Vishwas > > > > > > > Thanks, > > Bruno > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Vishwas > > > > > > On Feb 9, 2008 2:42 PM, Kireeti Kompella wrote: > > > > On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Loa Andersson wrote: > > > > > > > > > Working Group, > > > > > > > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > > > > > > > > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > > > > > > > > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > > > > > your comments to the working group mailing list. > > > > > > > > support. > > > > > > > > > Loa and George > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Loa Andersson > > > > > > > > > > Principal Networking Architect > > > > > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > > > > > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > > > > > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > > > > > loa@pi.se > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kireeti. > > > > ------- > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mpls mailing list > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 07:15:36 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD50928CF47; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:15:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.426 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.426 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.339, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QayB-wQhkr9h; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:15:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A341F28CDAD; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:15:35 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3B7328CE98 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:15:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TcRv-h79D9GW for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:15:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18E2328CDAD for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:15:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from ftrdmel3.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.155]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:16:52 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:16:51 +0100 Message-ID: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05D1180E@ftrdmel3> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Fwd: wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" Thread-Index: AchuXLIzM3NWwysvTYK/nORreFN2JQAu2PXw References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se><70452ae70802130813m45224698n7f052c836940be28@mail.gmail.com> <70452ae70802130819xcba0878g2aa6d11466ed8e4c@mail.gmail.com> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Feb 2008 15:16:52.0563 (UTC) FILETIME=[A0AEB230:01C86F1C] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Fwd: wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi, > De=A0Raveendra Torvi > > Hi, > = > I have couple of points on the section below > > 7.2. Impact on routing convergence time > = > "The solution documented in this draft reduces the Linkstate database > size and the number of FIB entries. However, it does not decrease the > number of LFIB entries." > [...] > Imo, the solution documented in this draft by itself does not reduce the = linkstate database and FIB > entries, it is reduced by route summarization procedures of IGP, Agreed. > so above text needs rewording. Well, full wording would be something like: "The solution document in this = draft, allows the (re)use of route summarization in the IGP. As a result th= is reduces the link state database size and the number of FIB entries." Agreed the sentence is a short cut, but this point has been discussed in th= e sections 3 and 4 of the draft. So IMO, it doesn't need to be explained ag= ain at the end of this short draft. Yet, if you have a strong opinion on th= is, I can make the above change. > I also want to know author's opinion regarding combining LDP Fec Aggregat= ion idea, so that all the > inter-area scalability concerns are addressed comprehensively in one draf= t reducing LFIB entries is also very important for MPLS convergence. I'm not in favor of combining the two drafts: First, both drafts are in different stages. This draft is a straightforward= protocol extension which has been discussed in the MPLS WG for nearly thre= e years. We believe it is ready and I don't see what we would gain in delay= ing the work any further. Second, these are two different solution space: flat versus hierarchy. We c= an't really combine both. Combining would mean that a document would actual= ly specify two solutions. As a (negative) consequence, two routers complyin= g with such document could in fact be non-interoperable. > Ravi. > = > = > On Feb 6, 2008 12:07 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: > = > = > Working Group, > = > this is to initiate a working group last call on > = > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > = > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > your comments to the working group mailing list. > = > Loa and George > = > -- > Loa Andersson > = > Principal Networking Architect > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > loa@pi.se > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > = > = > = _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 08:43:02 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FE1528CFE0; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:43:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.172 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.172 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.735, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g37+rjhV7mgQ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:43:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27BEA3A7012; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:43:01 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0C9228CEBA for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:42:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D48nvsTiHzsc for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:42:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from rn-out-0910.google.com (rn-out-0910.google.com [64.233.170.188]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E0FD3A6BC2 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:42:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by rn-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id a46so729932rne.10 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:44:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.241.10 with SMTP id o10mr1318182wfh.155.1203007459100; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:44:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.164.14 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:44:18 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802140844q1454c7feo4e1bfd4eec2696fa@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 08:44:18 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com In-Reply-To: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05D117A5@ftrdmel3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> <20080209144037.D82281@kummer.juniper.net> <77ead0ec0802101217w2707d817p6ee67be533e0f0c2@mail.gmail.com> <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05CD120B@ftrdmel3> <77ead0ec0802131928s421e8f47t9f19631f598ae9fc@mail.gmail.com> <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05D117A5@ftrdmel3> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, dward@cisco.com Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Bruno, > > > The draft looks good otherwise (it does save a few routing entries). > > However in the case of PE to PE communication like we talk about, we > > could do things more intelligently by using the summary ASBR route > > which is anyway propagated in OSPF - (so a direct OSPF to LDP checking > > instead of the LDP to RIB mapping). This however will work only in > > case of PE routers (ASBR's) and not general aggregation case. > > Besides, this would be specific to OSPF whereas currently LDP is not. I agree the solution you give works for more use cases. However for the MPLS-VPN case the solution I am talking about would make an easier change (treat ASBR addresses - got through Summary ASBR LSA's - just like we treat routes), Thanks, Vishwas > > > > Thanks, > > Vishwas > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Bruno > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Vishwas > > > > > > > > On Feb 9, 2008 2:42 PM, Kireeti Kompella > wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Loa Andersson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Working Group, > > > > > > > > > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > > > > > > > > > > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > > > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. > Please send > > > > > > your comments to the working group mailing list. > > > > > > > > > > support. > > > > > > > > > > > Loa and George > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Loa Andersson > > > > > > > > > > > > Principal Networking Architect > > > > > > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > > > > > > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > > > > > > Kista, Sweden email: > loa.andersson@acreo.se > > > > > > loa@pi.se > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kireeti. > > > > > ------- > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 09:30:27 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAFD128D119; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p1p3x3wn3Enu; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD64B28D016; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:02 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 0656628CFFB; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080214173002.0656628CFFB@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:30:02 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-09.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --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 : MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption Author(s) : D. Maddux, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-09.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2008-02-14 This document details Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption, a suite of protocol modifications extending the concept of preemption with the goal of reducing/ eliminating traffic disruption of preempted Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths (TE LSPs). Initially MPLS RSVP-TE was defined supporting only immediate TE LSP displacement upon preemption. The utilization of a preemption pending flag helps more gracefully mitigate the re-route process of preempted TE LSP. For the brief period soft preemption is activated, reservations (though not necessarily traffic levels) are in effect under-provisioned until the TE LSP(s) can be re-routed. For this reason, the feature is primarily but not exclusively interesting in MPLS enabled IP networks with Differentiated Services and Traffic Engineering capabilities. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-09.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-soft-preemption-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-soft-preemption-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: <2008-02-14092928.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-09.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-09.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-14092928.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 11:45:36 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA44928D190; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:45:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0ru26JKGMvyp; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:45:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAD1C28D15B; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:45:08 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 3D9D228D147; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:45:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080214194501.3D9D228D147@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:45:01 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-mib-06.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --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 : Point-to-Multipoint Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) Management Information Base (MIB) module Author(s) : A. Farrel, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-mib-06.txt Pages : 58 Date : 2008-02-14 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes managed objects for point-to-multipoint (P2MP) Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) based traffic engineering (TE). The MIB module defined in this document is applicable to P2MP MPLS-TE by extensions to the MPLS-TE MIB module defined in RFC 3812. It is equally applicable to P2MP Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) in association with the GMPLS TE MIB module defined in RFC 4802. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-mib-06.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-p2mp-te-mib-06.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-p2mp-te-mib-06.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: <2008-02-14113557.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-mib-06.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-mib-06.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-14113557.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 13:23:17 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60BD23A6920; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:23:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.538 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.538 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.101, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z6Sy6YMNVIdb; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:23:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DA7A3A6821; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:23:16 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 001EE3A67F2 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:23:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3D+COy5TPw1p for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:23:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D24073A6821 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:23:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id m1ELOXcj016528 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:24:33 GMT Received: from your029b8cecfe (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1ELOWgE016518 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:24:32 GMT Message-ID: <00df01c86f4f$faf15a80$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> From: "Adrian Farrel" To: References: <20080214194501.3D9D228D147@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:24:22 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-mib-06.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Adrian Farrel List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. > > Title : Point-to-Multipoint Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic > Engineering (TE) Management Information Base (MIB) module Small updates. - Update author coordinates - Expand conformance statements for read-only and read-create cases. - Typos. - Add mplsTeP2mpScalarGroup. Adrian _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 15:27:18 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A426A3A692F; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:27:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.727 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.727 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.290, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JT5EXinMXpOI; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:27:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFD0E3A6834; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:27:17 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9C973A67B4 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:27:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PvBAG-6BJFUn for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:27:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.169]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31C0A3A67B2 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:27:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 25so76791wfa.31 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:28:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.191.2 with SMTP id o2mr1727876wff.101.1203031716805; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:28:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.164.14 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:28:36 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:28:36 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com, ina@juniper.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Folks, I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very complex. To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes will. Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. Thanks, Vishwas _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 19:39:54 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 549663A69F5; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:39:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.644 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.644 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.540, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s2PkTD+S0v1L; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:39:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B073A69EB; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:39:53 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9B983A69CE for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:39:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 135hF6-Oilfx for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:39:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from hu-out-0506.google.com (hu-out-0506.google.com [72.14.214.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 966B13A69BE for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:39:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by hu-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 31so10527356huc.14 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:41:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.62.3 with SMTP id k3mr2038901fga.8.1203046870314; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:41:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.91.8 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:41:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:41:10 -0600 From: "Wyatt S" To: "Vishwas Manral" In-Reply-To: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1927997359==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============1927997359== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3054_28946588.1203046870305" ------=_Part_3054_28946588.1203046870305 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You want fewer LSAs in the end, not more. On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very > complex. > > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. > > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected > into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes > will. > > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > > Thanks, > Vishwas > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > ------=_Part_3054_28946588.1203046870305 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization?  You want fewer LSAs in the end, not more.


On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Folks,

I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is
that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the
Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent
us to have proper connectivity between the PE's.

I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It
turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as
well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very
complex.

To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I
added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens
using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask
matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet
allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain.

Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected
into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will
not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes
will.

Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same.

Thanks,
Vishwas
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

------=_Part_3054_28946588.1203046870305-- --===============1927997359== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1927997359==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 19:46:48 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3E813A69B7; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:46:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.945 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.945 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.240, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PHLuISPPbN2f; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:46:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94D8D3A688B; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:46:47 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DBFF3A6878 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:46:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FGwJlEfiasdV for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:46:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from hu-out-0506.google.com (hu-out-0506.google.com [72.14.214.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD8A53A67E6 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:46:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by hu-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 31so10528043huc.14 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:48:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.62.3 with SMTP id k3mr2011336fga.71.1203047284589; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:48:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.91.8 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:48:04 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:48:04 -0600 From: "Wyatt S" To: "Vishwas Manral" In-Reply-To: <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0428336212==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============0428336212== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3068_24344831.1203047284577" ------=_Part_3068_24344831.1203047284577 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Since I spoke up. I do have a question. What happens when an LEC attempts to create an LSP to an LEC that's in a summary, but not active? So the source LEC FIB and its local area's LSR FIBs all see the summary route, but the ABR LSR then sends the no route response back downstream. How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP, and should something like that be covered in this RFC? On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > > Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You want fewer > LSAs in the end, not more. > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is > > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the > > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent > > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > > > > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It > > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as > > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very > > complex. > > > > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I > > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens > > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask > > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet > > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. > > > > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected > > into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will > > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes > > will. > > > > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > > > > Thanks, > > Vishwas > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > ------=_Part_3068_24344831.1203047284577 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Since I spoke up.  I do have a question.  What happens when an LEC attempts to create an LSP to an LEC that's in a summary, but not active?  So the source LEC FIB and its local area's LSR FIBs all see the summary route, but the ABR LSR then sends the no route response back downstream. 

How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP, and should something like that be covered in this RFC?

On 2/14/08, Wyatt S <ietf@bgp4.us> wrote:
Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization?  You want fewer LSAs in the end, not more.



On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Folks,

I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is
that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the
Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent
us to have proper connectivity between the PE's.

I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It
turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as
well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very
complex.

To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I
added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens
using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask
matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet
allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain.

Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected
into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will
not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes
will.

Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same.

Thanks,
Vishwas
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


------=_Part_3068_24344831.1203047284577-- --===============0428336212== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0428336212==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 20:06:07 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8875C3A69C4; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:06:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.136 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.136 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.699, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QhAUR3IK-pwG; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:06:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D05F3A689D; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:06:06 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A6B83A689D for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:06:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cqUq4yYsE6x1 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:06:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from hs-out-0708.google.com (hs-out-0708.google.com [64.233.178.240]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 886993A6868 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:06:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by hs-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id 54so350486hsz.5 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:07:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.178.13 with SMTP id a13mr1884614wff.129.1203048442948; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:07:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.164.14 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:07:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802142007q2ca6713g189ef10c794275c1@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:07:22 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: "Wyatt S" In-Reply-To: <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Wyatt, By doing what we do now, we are injecting only PE router routes across the domain, all other summarization will still happen fine. The basic assumption however is that the PE routes make up only a small portion of all the routes summarized. Thinking of it that should not be too many routes, just the number of PE's, which in my view should not be much at all compared to all the routes in the domain. Thanks, Vishwas On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Wyatt S wrote: > Since I spoke up. I do have a question. What happens when an LEC attempts > to create an LSP to an LEC that's in a summary, but not active? So the > source LEC FIB and its local area's LSR FIBs all see the summary route, but > the ABR LSR then sends the no route response back downstream. > > How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP, and should > something like that be covered in this RFC? > > > > On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > > Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You want fewer > LSAs in the end, not more. > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is > > > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the > > > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent > > > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > > > > > > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It > > > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as > > > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very > > > complex. > > > > > > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I > > > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens > > > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask > > > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet > > > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. > > > > > > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected > > > into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will > > > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes > > > will. > > > > > > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Vishwas > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mpls mailing list > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 20:15:14 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70FC83A69E3; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:15:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.059 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.059 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.622, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qm1wKMmxl5hR; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:15:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BC8F3A6843; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:15:13 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 857D93A6843 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:15:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pRDXfBjYzj6R for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:15:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from hs-out-0708.google.com (hs-out-0708.google.com [64.233.178.247]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80D053A67E6 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:15:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by hs-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id 54so352262hsz.5 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:16:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.242.8 with SMTP id p8mr1899880wfh.70.1203048991519; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:16:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.164.14 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:16:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802142016x233a75fdi29cf381d32513622@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:16:31 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: "Wyatt S" In-Reply-To: <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Wyatt, I do not know which RFC you talk about. Look at the example given in the Inter-area draft to understand the detail. If you are talking about the summarization idea, the summary LSP (for the discard route) will be created till one Hop before the ABR (border router between areas). The behavior is going to be the same like normal IP routing. A packet not matching any of the constituent routes of a summary will be discarded by the ABR. Thanks, Vishwas On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Wyatt S wrote: > Since I spoke up. I do have a question. What happens when an LEC attempts > to create an LSP to an LEC that's in a summary, but not active? So the > source LEC FIB and its local area's LSR FIBs all see the summary route, but > the ABR LSR then sends the no route response back downstream. > > How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP, and should > something like that be covered in this RFC? > > > > On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > > Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You want fewer > LSAs in the end, not more. > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is > > > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the > > > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent > > > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > > > > > > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It > > > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as > > > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very > > > complex. > > > > > > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I > > > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens > > > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask > > > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet > > > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. > > > > > > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected > > > into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will > > > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes > > > will. > > > > > > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Vishwas > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mpls mailing list > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 20:30:01 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A4663A69D8; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:30:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.357 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.357 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.172, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uQS8nDn-0bDP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:30:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865F13A6878; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:30:00 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75B5E3A6878 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:29:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YqnuClAjSO3Y for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:29:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from hu-out-0506.google.com (hu-out-0506.google.com [72.14.214.231]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B293A6868 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:29:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by hu-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 31so10532756huc.14 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:31:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.25.17 with SMTP id 17mr2029634fgy.73.1203049878279; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:31:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.91.8 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:31:18 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <99168c310802142031pc7ce522l51b5ba7258d7a460@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:31:18 -0600 From: "Wyatt S" To: "Vishwas Manral" In-Reply-To: <77ead0ec0802142007q2ca6713g189ef10c794275c1@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> <77ead0ec0802142007q2ca6713g189ef10c794275c1@mail.gmail.com> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org The draft details the current options: o set up the required MPLS LSPs between PEs in different IGP areas, services providers have currently three solutions: LDP with IGP route leaking, BGP [MPLS-BGP] over LDP with MPLS hierarchy, or also inter- area RSVP-TE [ID-RSVP-TE]. You're offering option 1: IGP route leaking On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > Hi Wyatt, > > By doing what we do now, we are injecting only PE router routes across > the domain, all other summarization will still happen fine. > > The basic assumption however is that the PE routes make up only a > small portion of all the routes summarized. Thinking of it that should > not be too many routes, just the number of PE's, which in my view > should not be much at all compared to all the routes in the domain. > > Thanks, > > Vishwas > > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Wyatt S wrote: > > Since I spoke up. I do have a question. What happens when an LEC attempts > > to create an LSP to an LEC that's in a summary, but not active? So the > > source LEC FIB and its local area's LSR FIBs all see the summary route, but > > the ABR LSR then sends the no route response back downstream. > > > > How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP, and should > > something like that be covered in this RFC? > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > > > Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You want fewer > > LSAs in the end, not more. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > > > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is > > > > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the > > > > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent > > > > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > > > > > > > > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It > > > > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as > > > > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very > > > > complex. > > > > > > > > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I > > > > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens > > > > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask > > > > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet > > > > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. > > > > > > > > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected > > > > into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will > > > > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes > > > > will. > > > > > > > > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Vishwas > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 14 20:58:27 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD20F3A6A4B; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:58:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.047 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.047 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.610, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MY1H8i5Y+pH0; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:58:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25E413A6A16; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:58:26 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64DA33A6A16 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:58:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JtcFfbE70omU for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:58:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.182]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3659A3A69F7 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:58:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id x19so893433pyg.24 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:59:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.131.18 with SMTP id e18mr1934160wfd.36.1203051582518; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:59:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.164.14 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:59:42 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802142059r39f0094fi78ce150224ba7daa@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:59:42 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: "Wyatt S" In-Reply-To: <99168c310802142031pc7ce522l51b5ba7258d7a460@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> <77ead0ec0802142007q2ca6713g189ef10c794275c1@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802142031pc7ce522l51b5ba7258d7a460@mail.gmail.com> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Wyatt, You are right in the problem statement section it talks about the same. The draft talks about the same thing in the next paragraph, after the paragraph you have pointed to. I got confused reading Section 7.1. It states: If all IP prefixes are leaked in the IGP backbone area and only stub areas use IP aggregation, LSRs in the backbone area don't need to be compliant with this document. I guess this should be changed to: If all PE router host addresses are leaked across the IGP areas using host specific(i.e. /32 for IPv4) summarization, LSRs in the domain need to be compliant with this document. . Thanks, Vishwas On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Wyatt S wrote: > The draft details the current options: > > o set up the required MPLS LSPs between PEs in different IGP areas, > services providers have currently three solutions: LDP with IGP route > leaking, BGP [MPLS-BGP] over LDP with MPLS hierarchy, or also inter- > area RSVP-TE [ID-RSVP-TE]. > > You're offering option 1: IGP route leaking > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > Hi Wyatt, > > > > By doing what we do now, we are injecting only PE router routes across > > the domain, all other summarization will still happen fine. > > > > The basic assumption however is that the PE routes make up only a > > small portion of all the routes summarized. Thinking of it that should > > not be too many routes, just the number of PE's, which in my view > > should not be much at all compared to all the routes in the domain. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Vishwas > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Wyatt S wrote: > > > Since I spoke up. I do have a question. What happens when an LEC attempts > > > to create an LSP to an LEC that's in a summary, but not active? So the > > > source LEC FIB and its local area's LSR FIBs all see the summary route, but > > > the ABR LSR then sends the no route response back downstream. > > > > > > How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP, and should > > > something like that be covered in this RFC? > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > > > > Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You want fewer > > > LSAs in the end, not more. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > > > > > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is > > > > > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the > > > > > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent > > > > > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > > > > > > > > > > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It > > > > > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as > > > > > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very > > > > > complex. > > > > > > > > > > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I > > > > > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens > > > > > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask > > > > > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet > > > > > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. > > > > > > > > > > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected > > > > > into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will > > > > > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes > > > > > will. > > > > > > > > > > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Vishwas > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 15 01:07:50 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 257C028D003; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:07:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.409 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.409 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.322, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BZSoi4-HxVg8; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:07:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1793E28CF5D; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:07:49 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79D9228CF47 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:07:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dtQrUtRschY5 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:07:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.16]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E4DE28CF1D for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:07:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from ftrdmel3.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.155]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:09:07 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:09:05 +0100 Message-ID: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05D11AE3@ftrdmel3> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP Thread-Index: AchvhZMc94FhdhQIRCi2ERi0+dhA9wAJ/eng References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Feb 2008 09:09:07.0052 (UTC) FILETIME=[6B06AAC0:01C86FB2] Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, dward@cisco.com Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi, > De=A0: Wyatt S [mailto:ietf@bgp4.us] > = > Since I spoke up. I do have a question. What happens when an LEC attemp= ts to create an LSP to an > LEC that's in a summary, but not active? So the source LEC FIB and its l= ocal area's LSR FIBs all > see the summary route, but the ABR LSR then sends the no route response b= ack downstream. > = > How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP, and sho= uld something like that be > covered in this RFC? As a first answer, usually for packet interfaces (i.e. all link types excep= t ATM and frame relay), MPLS routers (LER/LSR) use the LDP downstream unsol= icited mode. In this mode the FEC is advertised by the downstream LSR witho= ut any solicitation from its upstream neighbor. So your above case would no= t happen. Now, in the general case, the LSR would behave as already described in RFC = 5036. In the example you raised, it's described in section "A.1.10. Receiv= e Notification / No Route". In summary, it states: "The LSR either will tak= e no further action, or it will defer the label request by starting a timer= and send another Label Request message to the peer when the timer later ex= pires." Regards, Bruno > = > On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > = > Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You want fewer = LSAs in the end, not > more. > = > = > = > = > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > = > Hi Folks, > = > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > = > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very > complex. > = > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. > = > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected > into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes > will. > = > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > = > Thanks, > Vishwas > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > = > = > = > = _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 15 01:23:09 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D581828CFB9; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:23:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.388 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.301, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J8aK9rRqDBR6; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:23:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E1863A6966; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:23:08 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 728793A6973 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:23:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1EkFRK-XXY87 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:23:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail2.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.16]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16EF93A6966 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:23:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from ftrdmel3.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.155]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:24:25 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:24:24 +0100 Message-ID: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05D11B09@ftrdmel3> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP Thread-Index: Achvj5THXAOpHxyXRnmLktmFAhysbgAItw7g References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> <77ead0ec0802142007q2ca6713g189ef10c794275c1@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802142031pc7ce522l51b5ba7258d7a460@mail.gmail.com> <77ead0ec0802142059r39f0094fi78ce150224ba7daa@mail.gmail.com> From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Feb 2008 09:24:25.0382 (UTC) FILETIME=[8E64B460:01C86FB4] Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, dward@cisco.com Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Vishwas, > De=A0: Vishwas Manral [mailto:vishwas.ietf@gmail.com] > = > Hi Wyatt, > = > You are right in the problem statement section it talks about the > same. The draft talks about the same thing in the next paragraph, > after the paragraph you have pointed to. > = > I got confused reading Section 7.1. It states: > = > If all IP prefixes are leaked in the IGP backbone area and only stub > areas use IP aggregation, LSRs in the backbone area don't need to be > compliant with this document. > = > I guess this should be changed to: > = > If all PE router host addresses are leaked across the IGP areas > using host specific(i.e. /32 for IPv4) summarization, LSRs in the dom= ain > need to be compliant with this document. . This section 7.1 is about "Deployment considerations". Basically, the sentence you refer to says that LSR need only be compliant w= ith this document if route aggregation is used in the routing domain. So fa= r this is fairly obvious so an example of such deployment is provided: if y= ou use aggregation only in (some) (stub) edge areas (i.e. specific prefixes= are leaked in other areas, including the backbone area), LSR in others are= as don't need to be compliant with this document. In short, this extension does not necessarily require an AS wide deployment= but can use on a per area basis. So to address your clarification comment, I propose to add the above senten= ce and to add "specific" before "IP prefixes". > Thanks, > Vishwas > = > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Wyatt S wrote: > > The draft details the current options: > > > > o set up the required MPLS LSPs between PEs in different IGP areas, > > services providers have currently three solutions: LDP with IGP route > > leaking, BGP [MPLS-BGP] over LDP with MPLS hierarchy, or also inter- > > area RSVP-TE [ID-RSVP-TE]. > > > > You're offering option 1: IGP route leaking > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > Hi Wyatt, > > > > > > By doing what we do now, we are injecting only PE router routes acr= oss > > > the domain, all other summarization will still happen fine. > > > > > > The basic assumption however is that the PE routes make up only a > > > small portion of all the routes summarized. Thinking of it that sho= uld > > > not be too many routes, just the number of PE's, which in my view > > > should not be much at all compared to all the routes in the domain. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Vishwas > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Wyatt S wrote: > > > > Since I spoke up. I do have a question. What happens when an LE= C attempts > > > > to create an LSP to an LEC that's in a summary, but not active? = So the > > > > source LEC FIB and its local area's LSR FIBs all see the summary = route, but > > > > the ABR LSR then sends the no route response back downstream. > > > > > > > > How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP,= and should > > > > something like that be covered in this RFC? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > > > > > Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You wa= nt fewer > > > > LSAs in the end, not more. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensio= ns is > > > > > > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caugh= t in the > > > > > > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. thi= s prevent > > > > > > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > > > > > > > > > > > > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we hav= e. It > > > > > > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to ha= ppen, as > > > > > > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not= very > > > > > > complex. > > > > > > > > > > > > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current set= up, I > > > > > > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSP= F happens > > > > > > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest ma= sk > > > > > > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at al= l yet > > > > > > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domai= n. > > > > > > > > > > > > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes= injected > > > > > > into the domain. However this is different as the static rout= es will > > > > > > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summar= y routes > > > > > > will. > > > > > > > > > > > > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Vishwas > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 15 01:51:21 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E282528D070; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:51:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.648 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.211, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f3O1imhYnQnS; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:51:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E03D53A6A6C; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:51:20 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED39D3A69BD; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:51:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lKEa35OgH25b; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:51:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (mailgw4.ericsson.se [193.180.251.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 221C63A67AE; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:51:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 26E69213F6; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:52:37 +0100 (CET) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3e-aa9ffbb000000b15-e1-47b560e53d33 Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.123]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 1982B21477; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:52:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.174]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:52:36 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([147.214.30.103]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:52:36 +0100 Message-ID: <47B560E3.2010506@ericsson.com> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:52:35 +0100 From: Magnus Westerlund User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tsvwg X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Feb 2008 09:52:36.0507 (UTC) FILETIME=[7E61E6B0:01C86FB8] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Cc: mpls@ietf.org, ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] WG last call for draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org This announces a WG last call for "User-Defined Errors for RSVP" to be published as proposed standard. Please provide any comments by March 7. (Yes, you get an extra week due to the just before the meeting time of this last call). CCAMP and MPLS WG participants, please provide your comments to TSVWG. You can find the draft here: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-03.txt Regards Magnus Westerlund IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ericsson AB | Phone +46 8 4048287 Torshamsgatan 23 | Fax +46 8 7575550 S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 15 06:31:52 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9AFD28D03C; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:31:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.269 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.269 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.084, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 82dFkkLfG6Rq; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:31:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A67C428C146; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:31:51 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 111E43A695E for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:31:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EhMBteCIGVO2 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:31:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from hu-out-0506.google.com (hu-out-0506.google.com [72.14.214.229]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58F083A69C2 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:31:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by hu-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 31so10686947huc.14 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:33:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.58.3 with SMTP id g3mr2584880fga.1.1203085987779; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:33:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.91.8 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:33:07 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <99168c310802150633v468b9ddcxff21d97a0e9ff0fc@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:33:07 -0600 From: "Wyatt S" To: "Vishwas Manral" In-Reply-To: <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org s/LEC/LER/ Sorry, I meant LER everywhere I put LEC. On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > Since I spoke up. I do have a question. What happens when an LEC attempts > to create an LSP to an LEC that's in a summary, but not active? So the > source LEC FIB and its local area's LSR FIBs all see the summary route, but > the ABR LSR then sends the no route response back downstream. > > How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP, and should > something like that be covered in this RFC? > > > On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > > Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You want fewer > LSAs in the end, not more. > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is > > > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the > > > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent > > > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > > > > > > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It > > > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as > > > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very > > > complex. > > > > > > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I > > > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens > > > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask > > > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet > > > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. > > > > > > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected > > > into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will > > > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes > > > will. > > > > > > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Vishwas > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mpls mailing list > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 15 06:55:16 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33D4D3A6B0E; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:55:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.722 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.722 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.285, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id isK1XL0tt42p; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:55:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E834D3A6ACA; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:55:14 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B8A93A6ACA for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:55:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id USvQ+cskhPLm for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:55:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from el-out-1112.google.com (el-out-1112.google.com [209.85.162.182]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A6473A6A9A for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:55:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by el-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id j27so833942elf.25 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:56:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.52.9 with SMTP id z9mr2333030wfz.134.1203087391622; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:56:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.164.14 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:56:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802150656v4223f6dem843df06876476fbb@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:56:31 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: bruno.decraene@orange-ftgroup.com In-Reply-To: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05D11B09@ftrdmel3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <77ead0ec0802141528p1dfa3756g5a2a9c50e92e8119@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141941o3cb5a9d7s97c81ed632f17657@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802141948r2a655afvd6eaeee97f42c11b@mail.gmail.com> <77ead0ec0802142007q2ca6713g189ef10c794275c1@mail.gmail.com> <99168c310802142031pc7ce522l51b5ba7258d7a460@mail.gmail.com> <77ead0ec0802142059r39f0094fi78ce150224ba7daa@mail.gmail.com> <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05D11B09@ftrdmel3> Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, dward@cisco.com Subject: Re: [mpls] Inter-Area LSP X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org HI Bruno, I am ok with the change. Thanks, Vishwas On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 1:24 AM, wrote: > Hi Vishwas, > > > De : Vishwas Manral [mailto:vishwas.ietf@gmail.com] > > > > > Hi Wyatt, > > > > You are right in the problem statement section it talks about the > > same. The draft talks about the same thing in the next paragraph, > > after the paragraph you have pointed to. > > > > I got confused reading Section 7.1. It states: > > > > If all IP prefixes are leaked in the IGP backbone area and only stub > > areas use IP aggregation, LSRs in the backbone area don't need to be > > compliant with this document. > > > > I guess this should be changed to: > > > > If all PE router host addresses are leaked across the IGP areas > > using host specific(i.e. /32 for IPv4) summarization, LSRs in the domain > > need to be compliant with this document. . > > This section 7.1 is about "Deployment considerations". > Basically, the sentence you refer to says that LSR need only be compliant with this document if route aggregation is used in the routing domain. So far this is fairly obvious so an example of such deployment is provided: if you use aggregation only in (some) (stub) edge areas (i.e. specific prefixes are leaked in other areas, including the backbone area), LSR in others areas don't need to be compliant with this document. > > In short, this extension does not necessarily require an AS wide deployment but can use on a per area basis. > > So to address your clarification comment, I propose to add the above sentence and to add "specific" before "IP prefixes". > > > > > Thanks, > > Vishwas > > > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Wyatt S wrote: > > > The draft details the current options: > > > > > > o set up the required MPLS LSPs between PEs in different IGP areas, > > > services providers have currently three solutions: LDP with IGP route > > > leaking, BGP [MPLS-BGP] over LDP with MPLS hierarchy, or also inter- > > > area RSVP-TE [ID-RSVP-TE]. > > > > > > You're offering option 1: IGP route leaking > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > > Hi Wyatt, > > > > > > > > By doing what we do now, we are injecting only PE router routes across > > > > the domain, all other summarization will still happen fine. > > > > > > > > The basic assumption however is that the PE routes make up only a > > > > small portion of all the routes summarized. Thinking of it that should > > > > not be too many routes, just the number of PE's, which in my view > > > > should not be much at all compared to all the routes in the domain. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Vishwas > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Wyatt S wrote: > > > > > Since I spoke up. I do have a question. What happens when an LEC attempts > > > > > to create an LSP to an LEC that's in a summary, but not active? So the > > > > > source LEC FIB and its local area's LSR FIBs all see the summary route, but > > > > > the ABR LSR then sends the no route response back downstream. > > > > > > > > > > How often should/does the source LEC reattempt to create the LSP, and should > > > > > something like that be covered in this RFC? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Wyatt S wrote: > > > > > > Doesn't this defeat the purpose of route summarization? You want fewer > > > > > LSAs in the end, not more. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/14/08, Vishwas Manral wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I noticed that the reason to have the inter-area LSP extensions is > > > > > > > that specific host address of the PE (/32 for IPv4) are caught in the > > > > > > > Inter-Area summarization and are not injected Inter-Area. this prevent > > > > > > > us to have proper connectivity between the PE's. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I tried the some experiments using a Cisco router that we have. It > > > > > > > turned out that the solution to allow the summarization to happen, as > > > > > > > well as let the PE host specific routes to be injected is not very > > > > > > > complex. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To do the same, besides having the ranges for the current setup, I > > > > > > > added /32 ranges for each PE address. As summarization in OSPF happens > > > > > > > using the LPM match (the summary prefix having the longest mask > > > > > > > matches an address), we do not affect the summarization at all yet > > > > > > > allowing /32 prefixes to be distributed through out the domain. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some could argue that this is the same as doing static routes injected > > > > > > > into the domain. However this is different as the static routes will > > > > > > > not be removed when the PE becomes unreachable but the summary routes > > > > > > > will. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kireeti/ Yakov it will be great to get your views on the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Vishwas > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > > > > mpls@ietf.org > > > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 18 07:45:25 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52B8328C3DB; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.597 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.002, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CZKqQVFZHNkf; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 310873A6CD7; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:09 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id DB8FC3A6CCA; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080218154501.DB8FC3A6CCA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:01 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --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 : Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message Author(s) : J. Vasseur, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02.txt Pages : 8 Date : 2008-02-18 The aim of this document is to describe a common practice with regard to the behavior of a node sending a Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) Traffic Engineering (TE) Path Error message and to the behavior of a node receiving an RSVP Path Error message for a preempted Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering Label Switched Path (TE LSP). This document does not define any new protocol extensions. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-3209-patherr-02.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-3209-patherr-02.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: <2008-02-18073321.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-18073321.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 18 07:45:52 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 139EF28C4F2; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.597 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.002, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fbmLNDCY9-56; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E9B28C47A; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:28 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id E3E5528C2EB; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080218154501.E3E5528C2EB@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 07:45:01 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-10.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --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 : MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption Author(s) : D. Maddux, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-10.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2008-02-18 This document details Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption, a suite of protocol modifications extending the concept of preemption with the goal of reducing/ eliminating traffic disruption of preempted Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths (TE LSPs). Initially MPLS RSVP-TE was defined supporting only immediate TE LSP displacement upon preemption. The utilization of a preemption pending flag helps more gracefully mitigate the re-route process of preempted TE LSP. For the brief period soft preemption is activated, reservations (though not necessarily traffic levels) are in effect under-provisioned until the TE LSP(s) can be re-routed. For this reason, the feature is primarily but not exclusively interesting in MPLS enabled IP networks with Differentiated Services and Traffic Engineering capabilities. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-10.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-soft-preemption-10.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-soft-preemption-10.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: <2008-02-18073341.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-10.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-10.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-18073341.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 18 08:26:44 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1E3B28C3E7; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:26:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.161 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.161 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.276, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zw9qqaYI1Vo3; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:26:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7441E28C329; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:26:43 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA6903A6CE9 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:26:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JwRka+hAGbPy for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:26:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw.testbed.se (smtp.testbed.se [80.86.78.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4F4A3A6CA6 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:26:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from MailerDaemon by fw.testbed.se with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JR8p7-0002FC-4v for mpls@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:26:33 +0100 Received: from [195.70.5.235] (port=61646 helo=[172.16.2.179]) by fw.testbed.se with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JR8p5-0002F4-Vp; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:26:32 +0100 Message-ID: <47B9B1AB.1020802@pi.se> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:26:19 +0100 From: Loa Andersson Organization: Acreo AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Cc: Ross Callon , David Ward Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and Soft Preemption) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Working Group, this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group documents: "Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" and "MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been "on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that that document was required to progress the soft preemption document. This document is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. Please send your comments to the working group mailing list prior to EOB March 3. Loa and George -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 22 10:35:10 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89D2228C440; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:35:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.418 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.418 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.541, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=1, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mrDh5jKdETZd; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:35:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31C773A67F7; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:35:09 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8EF3A67A1 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:35:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RVjLC4rSce-2 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:35:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail92.messagelabs.com (mail92.messagelabs.com [194.106.220.51]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1B8CC28C1F6 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:35:06 -0800 (PST) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: Jonathan.Newton@cw.com X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-92.messagelabs.com!1203705300!27573288!3 X-StarScan-Version: 5.5.12.14.2; banners=cw.com,-,- X-Originating-IP: [213.216.141.96] Received: (qmail 24436 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2008 18:35:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO GBCWSWIEC001.ad.plc.cwintra.com) (213.216.141.96) by server-2.tower-92.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 22 Feb 2008 18:35:01 -0000 Received: from GBCWSWIEM001.ad.plc.cwintra.com ([148.185.93.203]) by GBCWSWIEC001.ad.plc.cwintra.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:35:00 +0000 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:35:00 -0000 Message-ID: <4727AF472FEE6A4EB87D83210CF11CDC08B2535C@GBCWSWIEM001.ad.plc.cwintra.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) Thread-Index: Ach1gZ2iU/9Dk0wnSdqg8doRS8NbnA== From: "Newton, Jonathan" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Feb 2008 18:35:00.0897 (UTC) FILETIME=[A1FC8110:01C87581] Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0708964143==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============0708964143== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C87581.A1B6DD73" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C87581.A1B6DD73 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi=20all, I=20would=20just=20like=20to=20highlight=20my=20support=20for=20the=20two=20= drafts=20listed=20in the=20subject=20line=20moving=20forwards;=20I=20have=20no=20new=20comments= =20to=20make=20on=20the content. Cheers, ~Jon. Jonathan=20Newton Architect,=20Service=20Platforms Cable&Wireless Europe,=20Asia=20and=20US www.cw.com This=20e-mail=20has=20been=20scanned=20for=20viruses=20by=20the=20Cable=20= &=20Wireless=20e-mail=20security=20system=20-=20powered=20by=20MessageLabs= .=20For=20more=20information=20on=20a=20proactive=20managed=20e-mail=20sec= urity=20service,=20visit=20http://www.cw.com/uk/emailprotection/=20 The=20information=20contained=20in=20this=20e-mail=20is=20confidential=20a= nd=20may=20also=20be=20subject=20to=20legal=20privilege.=20It=20is=20inten= ded=20only=20for=20the=20recipient(s)=20named=20above.=20If=20you=20are=20= not=20named=20above=20as=20a=20recipient,=20you=20must=20not=20read,=20cop= y,=20disclose,=20forward=20or=20otherwise=20use=20the=20information=20cont= ained=20in=20this=20email.=20If=20you=20have=20received=20this=20e-mail=20= in=20error,=20please=20notify=20the=20sender=20(whose=20contact=20details=20= are=20above)=20immediately=20by=20reply=20e-mail=20and=20delete=20the=20me= ssage=20and=20any=20attachments=20without=20retaining=20any=20copies. =20 Cable=20and=20Wireless=20plc=20 Registered=20in=20England=20and=20Wales.Company=20Number=20238525=20 Registered=20office:=207th=20Floor,=20The=20Point,=2037=20North=20Wharf=20= Road,=20London=20W2=201LA ------_=_NextPart_001_01C87581.A1B6DD73 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [mpls]=20WG=20Last=20Call=20on=20two=20related=20WG=20documents=20(= PathErr=20and=20SoftPreemption)

Hi=20all,

I=20would=20just=20like=20to=20highli= ght=20my=20support=20for=20the=20two=20drafts=20listed=20in=20the=20subjec= t=20line=20moving=20forwards;=20I=20have=20no=20new=20comments=20to=20make= =20on=20the=20content.

Cheers,
~Jon.

Jonathan=20Newton
Architect,=20Service=20Platforms
Cable&Wireless
Europe,=20Asia=20and=20US<= /B>
www.cw.com


This=20e-mail=20has=20been=20scanned=20for=20viruses=20by=20the=20Cable=20= &=20Wireless=20e-mail=20security=20system=20-=20powered=20by=20MessageLabs= .=20For=20more=20information=20on=20a=20proactive=20managed=20e-mail=20sec= urity=20service,=20visit=20http://www.cw.com/uk/emailprotection/=20

The=20information=20contained=20in=20this=20e-mail=20is=20confidential=20a= nd=20may=20also=20be=20subject=20to=20legal=20privilege.=20It=20is=20inten= ded=20only=20for=20the=20recipient(s)=20named=20above.=20If=20you=20are=20= not=20named=20above=20as=20a=20recipient,=20you=20must=20not=20read,=20cop= y,=20disclose,=20forward=20or=20otherwise=20use=20the=20information=20cont= ained=20in=20this=20email.=20If=20you=20have=20received=20this=20e-mail=20= in=20error,=20please=20notify=20the=20sender=20(whose=20contact=20details=20= are=20above)=20immediately=20by=20reply=20e-mail=20and=20delete=20the=20me= ssage=20and=20any=20attachments=20without=20retaining=20any=20copies.
=20
Cable=20and=20Wireless=20plc=20
Registered=20in=20England=20and=20Wales.Company=20Number=20238525=20
Registered=20office:=207th=20Floor,=20The=20Point,=2037=20North=20Wharf=20= Road,=20London=20W2=201LA
------_=_NextPart_001_01C87581.A1B6DD73-- --===============0708964143== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0708964143==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 22 10:45:52 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3687D28CA16; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:45:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.022 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.022 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.540, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YCpecS7pdE-s; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:45:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53BBE3A6893; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:45:50 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DE3528C31C for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:45:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NdjJQJ6eH2cI for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:45:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from coe.drexel.edu (cbis.ece.drexel.edu [129.25.60.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3BE23A68A8 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:45:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [129.25.14.14] (n1-14-14.dhcp.drexel.edu [129.25.14.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by coe.drexel.edu (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id m1MIlUSR018058; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 13:47:30 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <47B9B1AB.1020802@pi.se> References: <47B9B1AB.1020802@pi.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753) Message-Id: <47C3472B-A065-433D-A8E8-B8BF46856342@ece.drexel.edu> From: Jaudelice de Oliveira Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 13:46:10 -0500 To: Loa Andersson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.51 on 129.25.60.1 Cc: Ross Callon , mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and Soft Preemption) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0097028957==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============0097028957== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-5--87012482 --Apple-Mail-5--87012482 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed I would also like to express my support for both documents... I read them both and I think they are ready. Cheers, Jau. Jaudelice C. de Oliveira Assistant Professor ECE Dept., Drexel University http://www.ece.drexel.edu/faculty/deoliveira/ On Feb 18, 2008, at 11:26 AM, Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group > documents: > > "Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation > Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" > > > > and > > "MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" > > > > The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been > "on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the > term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that that > document > was required to progress the soft preemption document. This document > is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. > Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. > > Please send your comments to the working group mailing list prior to > EOB March 3. > > Loa and George > > > > > > > -- > Loa Andersson > > Principal Networking Architect > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > loa@pi.se > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --Apple-Mail-5--87012482 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

I would also like = to express my support for both documents...=A0I read them both and I = think they are ready.=A0

Cheers,
Jau.
=



Jaudelice C. de = Oliveira
Assistant = Professor
ECE Dept.,=A0Drexel University


<= div>On Feb 18, 2008, at 11:26 AM, Loa Andersson wrote:

Working Group,

this is to initiate a working = group last call on two working group

"Node behavior upon originating and receiving = Resource ReserVation=A0
Protocol = (RSVP) Path Error message"



"MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption"


The soft = preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been
"on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID = defining the
term "Hard preemption"; the = working group considered that that document
was = required to progress the soft preemption document. This = document
is the "PathErr-draft" and has = now have became a stable WG document.

Please send your comments to the working group = mailing list prior to
EOB March 3.

Loa and = George






--=A0
Loa = Andersson

Principal Networking Architect
Acreo AB =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 phone:=A0 +46 8 632 77 14
Isafjordsgatan 22=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = mobile: +46 739 81 21 64
Kista, = Sweden=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 email:=A0 = loa.andersson@acreo.se
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = loa@pi.se
mpls mailing list

= --Apple-Mail-5--87012482-- --===============0097028957== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0097028957==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 22 11:15:09 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52D6128C484; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:15:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p2M5eOv77dPs; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:15:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3FB228C510; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:15:04 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 6E3D728C41E; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:15:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080222191501.6E3D728C41E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 11:15:01 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-upstream-label-04.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --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 : MPLS Upstream Label Assignment and Context-Specific Label Space Author(s) : R. Aggarwal, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-upstream-label-04.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2008-02-22 RFC 3031 limits the MPLS architecture to downstream-assigned MPLS labels. This document introduces the notion of upstream-assigned MPLS labels. It describes the procedures for upstream MPLS label assignment and introduces the concept of a "Context-Specific Label Space". A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-upstream-label-04.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-upstream-label-04.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-upstream-label-04.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: <2008-02-22110348.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-upstream-label-04.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-upstream-label-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-22110348.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 22 15:30:12 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00CBC28C756; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:30:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.128 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.128 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.129, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_14=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id INe46Z+0HM+5; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:30:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 660883A6D1E; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:30:06 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id CA4D33A6D3F; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:30:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080222233001.CA4D33A6D3F@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:30:01 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-04.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --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 : Label Distribution Protocol Extensions for Point-to-Multipoint and Multipoint-to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths Author(s) : I. Minei Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-04.txt Pages : 34 Date : 2008-2-22 This document describes extensions to the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) for the setup of point to multi-point (P2MP) and multipoint-to- multipoint (MP2MP) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) networks. The solution relies on LDP without requiring a multicast routing protocol in the network. Protocol elements and procedures for this solution are described for building such LSPs in a receiver-initiated manner. There can be various applications for P2MP/MP2MP LSPs, for example IP multicast or support for multicast in BGP/MPLS L3VPNs. Specification of how such applications can use a LDP signaled P2MP/MP2MP LSP is outside the scope of this document. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-04.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-p2mp-04.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 --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sat Feb 23 00:03:28 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3A633A69B4; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:03:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.618 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.618 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.181, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C5iE+7lKy3Kn; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:03:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5AF03A68BB; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:03:27 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 637AF3A6946 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:03:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7IUGCcmVDiiE for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:03:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw.testbed.se (smtp.testbed.se [80.86.78.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B6343A6962 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:03:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from MailerDaemon by fw.testbed.se with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JSpLr-0007hC-DQ for mpls@ietf.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 09:03:19 +0100 Received: from 61-218-16-130.hinet-ip.hinet.net ([61.218.16.130]:2302 helo=[192.168.1.197]) by fw.testbed.se with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JSpLp-0007h4-Te; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 09:03:18 +0100 Message-ID: <47BFD336.2050500@pi.se> Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 09:03:02 +0100 From: Loa Andersson Organization: Acreo AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org, George Swallow , Ross Callon , David Ward , DECRAENE Bruno RD-CORE-ISS , LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN , Ina Minei References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> In-Reply-To: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Subject: [mpls] wg last call ended:Re: wg last call for "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org All, this working group last call has ended. There have been comments, could the authors review and respond to the comments, when the new ID is submitted please also make sure it passes the ID-nits tool cleanly. /Loa Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > your comments to the working group mailing list. > > Loa and George > -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Feb 24 10:30:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02B3F28C160; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:30:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.441 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.441 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.004, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F3Aq8CoqerfN; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:30:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1A7F3A6B3E; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:30:06 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F493A6BFD for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:30:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iFjwydt2wuA9 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:30:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14C5E3A6814 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:30:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id m1OITr26005365; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:29:54 GMT Received: from your029b8cecfe (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1OITp0r005331; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:29:53 GMT Message-ID: <003701c87713$3ebc7040$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> From: "Adrian Farrel" To: References: <04ef01c87612$ebae59a0$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> <00275A5B436CA441900CB10936742A382F43A7@FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com> Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:29:47 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org, PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri Subject: Re: [mpls] MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Adrian Farrel List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi MPLS WG, I passed on information about your WG last call on these drafts to CCAMP who probably have an interest in this topic as well. We have received the comments below. Please consider them as part of the last call. Thanks, Adrian ----- Original Message ----- From: "PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri" To: "Adrian Farrel" ; Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 2:16 PM Subject: RE: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) adrian. a base question: 2205 defines a mechanism for hard-preemption by tearing down state and a soft-preemption by error msg exchange only (no state modification) --> note that section 2.4 states: "A teardown request may be initiated either by an application in an end system (sender or receiver), or by a router as the result of state timeout or service preemption." 3209 defines a preemption mechanism with the following conditions: - If the requested bandwidth is not available a PathErr message is returned with an Error Code of 01, Admission Control Failure, and an Error Value of 0x0002. - If the requested bandwidth is available, but is in use by lower priority sessions, then lower priority sessions (beginning with the lowest priority) MAY be preempted to free the necessary bandwidth. [...] A ResvErr and/or PathErr with the code "Policy Control failure" SHOULD be sent toward the downstream receivers and upstream senders. but looking at 2205 these are following the soft-preemption rules. -> section 2 in the error doc. is confusing "This text is a clarification and re-statement of the procedures set out in [RFC3209] and does not define any new behavior." now, with these docs an error msg exchange (fatal) for hard-preemption (that remove states at detecting node and leaves subsequent decision at sender) and an error msg exchange (non-fatal) for soft-preemption (that does not remove state at detecting node and leaves subsequent decision at sender) -> section 2.3 of the error doc. "Any node clearing either or both the Path or the Resv state of a TE LSP MUST also free up the data plane resources allocated to the corresponding TE LSP." is basically confirming the initial 2205 mechanism behind hard-preemption (why keeping upstream state without resource at the detecting node ?). thanks, -d. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org > [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 12:55 PM > To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Fw: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents > (PathErr and SoftPreemption) > > Heads up in CCAMP. > > These I-Ds describe interpretations of RSVP-TE and have > implications for > GMPLS. > > Please review and comment to the MPLS mailing list. > > Thanks, > Adrian > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Loa Andersson" > To: > Cc: "Ross Callon" ; "David Ward" > > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 4:26 PM > Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and > SoftPreemption) > > > > Working Group, > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group > > documents: > > > > "Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation > > Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" > > > > > > > > and > > > > "MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" > > > > > > > > The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been > > "on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the > > term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that > that document > > was required to progress the soft preemption document. This document > > is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. > > Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. > > > > Please send your comments to the working group mailing list prior to > > EOB March 3. > > > > Loa and George > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Loa Andersson > > > > Principal Networking Architect > > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > > loa@pi.se > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Feb 24 19:38:44 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F1C83A6888; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:38:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.915 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.915 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.478, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WSKbIF1KXXbD; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:38:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9AFA3A6A7F; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:38:43 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E5E43A6A7F for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:38:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0YOspXLXOU8t for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:38:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (unknown [61.144.161.7]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF40E3A6888 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:38:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JWR00H6TZFUPT@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:38:18 +0800 (CST) Received: from c50408 ([10.111.12.113]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JWR00IW4ZFTHF@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:38:18 +0800 (CST) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:38:18 +0800 From: Cao Wei To: mpls Message-id: <200802251138176332582@huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Foxmail 6, 10, 201, 20 [cn] References: <20080222233001.CA4D33A6D3F@core3.amsl.com> Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-04.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org I am happy to see this draft is updated. I believe p2mp LDP is useful especially for MVPN. But I have one question want to be clarified: Do we need to improve the error notification ability of mLDP? That is, let LSP end (leaf nodes) know if there is a failure occurred. RFC 5037 documents the operational experience of LDP and Silent failures is one of the protocol issues. Also I got some feedbacks from customer that silent failure makes it is difficult to identify where/what the problem is, especially the error indication is from the up layer services (such as VOIP). The operators have to check the service related devices first since there is no notification from the carrier devices. This always takes time and makes the problem more serious. Compared to point to point LSP, failure of p2mp LSP can cause more serious outage. So I wound if there should have a mechanism to propagate the failure to the end of the LSP. I believe it is important for PE to know the LSP status and take action immediately when there is a failure. Regards, ------------------ Cao Wei 2008-02-25 _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Feb 24 23:00:12 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E12AD28C37B; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:00:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.416 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.416 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.021, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EDmiagTCZVEA; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:00:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B060228C203; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:00:09 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6747F3A6C0D; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:00:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BfxWQxsvjIIG; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:00:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3247E3A67F4; Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:00:07 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=qQWbe0nQmQ+cN2Le7lY/n59REv1kPXrKn7Dh+udSwcikvOMyIVq0DyHxOf8Z3iRw; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [141.154.111.86] (helo=JoanPC) by elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1JTXJc-0001DS-JW; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 01:59:57 -0500 Message-ID: <0d6f01c8777c$50396d50$6601a8c0@JoanPC> From: "Joan Cucchiara" To: "Nadeau Thomas" , "Joan Cucchiara" References: <088f01c8287f$037cd750$0db96540@cisco.com> <7661CC97-5115-4C0F-BA1D-98E0AC05A717@lucidvision.com> <0bef01c8755c$955473c0$6601a8c0@JoanPC> <5EE88370-3546-4BCD-BBF1-F8A1B0D97377@lucidvision.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 02:01:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-ELNK-Trace: 4d68bbe9cb71969ea344cf2d1a8e60840a9da525759e2654123ad57138b28890eba5119d20b562f82601a10902912494350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 141.154.111.86 Cc: mpls@ietf.org, "MIB Doctors \(E-mail\)" , Agrahara S Kiran Koushik Subject: [mpls] MIB DR review of draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-08.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org MIB Dr review of draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-08.txt Tom, et al. Following are the review comments from the previous version of the MIB. There are a few overall comments followed by comments in order of the document. I have indicated that the comment has been "DONE", "NOT DONE" or if comment is a new comment "NEW". Thanks, Joan Overall COMMENTs --------------- *) MIB compiles cleanly with smiLint and smicngPRO. (applies to version 8) *) First overall comment has to do with the organization of the MIB module itself; a better way to represent the objects would be to have separate MIB modules for General, One2One and Facility. Even the scalar objects seem dependent on which method is being used so seems that separate MIB modules would help to clarify this. Please comment. NOT DONE. (Think we need to get this comment addressed since many of the other comments marked NOT DONE are related to this.) *) I tried to be very specific about this during the commenting, but basically would ask that the names used be consistent with the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. For example, Tunnel, Index, Instance, Ingress, Egress and other words are spelled out when used in an object's name, but in this MIB Module these are abbreviated. Just looking for some consistency with the naming conventions used in the 2 MIBs since they are tightly coupled. DONE but not completely. This needs to be checked throughout the document since it is not updated consistenly, e.g. * Several places in the document use: mplsFrrTunARHopTable and this table was renamed mplsFrrTunnelARHopTable so please make this correction throughout entire document. COMMENTS ON DOC (as they appear in the doc) --------------------------------------------- *) Abstract: In particular, it describes managed objects for Multiprotocol Label Switching fast rerouting. suggestion to specify the 2 fast reroute methods: ...managed objects used to support two fast reroute (FRR) methods for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) based traffic engineering (TE). The two methods are one-to-one backup method and facility backup method. DONE. *) Date on the page headers do not match date of document. DONE. *) TOC References is off by a space. Also, the subsections 1.1, 4.1, 4.2 (maybe others) are missing from the TOC. DONE, BUT some sections have incorrect page numbers. Also, some spacing of off. *) 1. Introduction Would add RFC3811 also, i.e. used in conjunction with [RFC3811], [RFC3812] and [RFC3813]. DONE. *) NEW: following needs updating s/mpls@uu.net/mpls@ietf.org/ *) 2. Terminology Should state the title of the referenced docs here. So This document uses terminology defined in the "Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture" [RFC3031] document and the "Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels" [RFC4090] document. DONE. *) 4. Brief Description of the MIB Module Objects. s/Objects./Objects Would retitle this section: Overview of the MIB Module DONE. *)I am confused by the term "bypass" in this section. Are you referring to the one-to-one backup method described in [RFC4090]? Could the terms one-to-one and facility be used consistently? " The specification [RFC4090] stipulates two different approaches to implementing MPLS TE fast reroute: bypass and facility backup. As such, the MIB module defined in this document" s/bypass/one-to-one backup/ NOT DONE (bypass refers to a type of tunnel, not a backup method). "LSRs do not implement both facility and bypass methods at the same time, the Agent Compliance section in this module defined herein is divided into portions, one for each method allowing any LSR to implement only the objects applicable to the method they have implemneted." Either correct the above statement: s/Agent Compliance/Conformance s/implemneted/implemented or reword: "LSRs do not implement both one-to-one backup method and facility backup method at the same time, thus, the Conformance section specifies conformance based on the two fast reroute methods. This allows a developer to implement only the objects applicable to the fast reroute method supported." DONE. *) I would like to understand what is meant by common practice? Is it that vendors don't support both methods at the same time, or is it that operators don't mix these 2 methods in a network? NOT DONE. Part of my confusion is the phrase "common practice has shown that LSRs do not implement both..." Is the issue that LSRs do not support both, or that operators choose to configure only one method on an LSR? In other words, could you be specific about what the common practice is? In my mind, this is important to your justification of why the MIB is only going to allow one kind of backup method on an LSR. *) 4.1 mplsFrrConstTable Please use the entire name Constraints, as in mplsFrrConstraintsTable. DONE, BUT TOC needs to be updated with new tabel name. *) 4.2 mplsFrrTunARHopTable Please use mplsFrrTunnelARHopTable to match with mplsTunnelARHopTable. First sentence: s/mplsTunnelARHop table/mplsTunnelARHopTable DONE, BUT TOC and other places need to be updated with new table name. *) 4.3 mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable "The mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable is an optional table that contains lists of PLRs that initiated detour LSPs to protect tunnel instances. As such, it is only required for LSRs implementing the detour backup method. In these cases, the detour LSPs are reflected in the mplsFrrDetourTable." I don't understand the above. Is this table mandatory when the one-to-one backup method is used? If so, shouldn't that be stated. The definition from RFC 4090 states: "PLR: Point of Local Repair. The head-end LSR of a backup tunnel or a detour LSP." So the phrase "contains lists of PLRs" is confusing. Also, the phrase "detour backup method" is confusing, are you referring to the one-to-one backup method? DONE. 4.4 mplsFrrDetourTable *) Could this be renamed to mplsFrrOne2OneDetourTable? DONE, BUT TOC needs to be updated. *) NEW (NIT) "In the mplsTunnelTable, the higher 16 bits of the tunnel instance SHOULD be used as detour instance. Note that for the protected..." s/be used as/be uses as a/ *) Is this table mandatory when the one-to-one backup method is used? If so, could that be stated? "This table is optional and is only required in case mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable is supported." If you state that the table is mandatory for the backup method, then think the above statement is not necessary. DONE. *) 4.5 mplsFrrFacilityDBTable s/mplsFrrDBTable/mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable Could this be renamed to mplsFrrFacilty DONE. *) Could you state that this table is mandatory when the facility backup method is used? DONE. *) 5. Handling IPv6 Tunnels draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-addressing-03 does not appear as a reference, please add to Normative References. DONE. *) 6 (MIB MODULE) *) LAST-UPDATED and REVISION is incorrect DONE. *) NEW. Please remove the REVISION/DESCRIPTION clauses except for the latest version of the MIB. The REVISION clause is typically used for RFC revisions (not draft revisions). *) DESCRIPTION: ...This MIB module is part of RFC 4327; see the RFC itself for full legal notices. needs to be changed to something like This version of this MIB module is part of RFC xxxx; See the RFC itself for full legal notices. -- RFC EDITOR: please replace xxxx with actual number -- and remove this note. NOT DONE. *) Please change to yyy ::= { mplsStdMIB yyy } -- RFC-editor please fill in -- yyy with value assigned by IANA, -- see section 18.1 for details DONE. *) Please change mplsFrrNotif to mplsFrrNotifications DONE. *) Doesn't seem necessary to have mplsFrrScalars OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 1 } mplsFrrObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 2 } Since Scalars are objects, right? So maybe just use mplsFrrObjects mplsFrrObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 1 } mplsFrrConformance OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 2 } NOT DONE. *) Also, please move mplsFrrConformance under mplsFrrObjects. NOT DONE. *) As stated above, I believe this MIB should be organized in 3 separate MIB Modules. This would help to clarify what actually needs to be supported when using One2One or Facility. The following scalars seem to be dependent on the type of backup method: mplsFrrDetourIncoming mplsFrrDetourOutgoing mplsFrrDetourOriginating mplsFrrConfIfs mplsFrrActProtectedIfs mplsFrrConfProtectionTuns mplsFrrActProtectionTuns mplsFrrActProtectedLSPs mplsFrrNotifsEnabled mplsFrrNotifMaxRate So why are these under General Objects? DONE (sort of). The scalars which apply to one-to-one backup or facility backup should be co-located with their respective tables. This is just a cut-n-paste and would go a long way to make the MIB Module more readable. *) NEW the mplsFrrFacObjects name should be changed to mplsFrrFacilityObjects. The tables use the entire word Facility so this would be for consistency. *) mplsFrrProtectionMethod Scalar should probably be moved to being the first scalar. Also, I think an unknown(1) should be added. The reason is that if a device has been rebooted, due to a change from one fast reroute method to another, and if something were misconfigured, then it might be that the fast reroute method would be "unknown" until a correction was made. Obviously, "unknown" would be read-only and not settable. Would suggest: unknown(1), onetooneBackup(2), facilityBackup(3) DONE. *) Last sentence s/notified/generated/ DONE. *) NEW for mplsFrrProtectedMethod Please include in the DESCRIPTION clause what error should be returned if the value of unknown(1) is set. *) NEW, most of the DESCRIPTION clauses in the other objects which refer to this object (mplsFrrProtectedMethod) need to be updated (this means most of the scalars). *) mplsFrrSwitchover Should this be a Gauge32? DONE. *) mplsFrrNotifsEnabled. Why is this object needed? NOT DONE. Please answer the question wrt RFC3413. *) mplsFrrNotificationsMaxRate Are there other objects which indicate if events are being thrown away due to this throttling? (Would that be useful?) NOT DONE. Please answer the question. I would think such an object (or objects) would be useful information if throttling is done. *) mplsFrrDetourIncoming Should be put with the oneToOne objects. Should this be a Counter32 or Gauge32? NOT DONE. *)Please rename to mplsFrrIncomingDetourLSPs DONE. *) mplsFrrDetourOutgoing Should be put with the oneToOne objects. Should this be a Counter32 or Gauge32? NOT DONE. *) please rename to mplsFrrOutgoingDetourLSPs DONE. *) Could mplsFrrConfIfs be renamed to: mplsFrrConfiguredInterfaces DONE. *)Also, this should apply only to facilityBackup, so could be a Gauge32 or Counter32? NOT DONE. *) mplsFrrActProtectedIfs What does the Act stand for? Is this Active or Actual? Could this be renamed to mplsFrrActiveInterfaces/mplsFrrActualInterfaces DONE. *) mplsFrrConfProtectionsTuns Could this be renamed mplsFrrConfiguredBypassTunnels ? DONE. *) NEW could DESCRIPTION say the value must be 0 and should be ignored. *) mplsFrrActProtectionTuns Could this be renamed to mplsFrrActiveBypassTunnels? DONE. *) NEW DESCRIPTION should say, the value must be 0 and should be ignored. *) mplsFrrActProtectedLSPs could this be renamed to: mplsFrrActiveProtectedLSPs? DONE. *) NEW DESCRIPTION should say, the value must be 0 and should be ignored. *) mplsFrrConstTable Please rename to mplsFrrConstraintsTable DONE. *) mplsFrrConstEntry OBJECT-TYPE Please add a REFERENCE clause and add the reference from the DESCRIPTION clause to the REFERENCE clause. DONE. s/speciifed/specified DONE. "contains at a tunnel ingress." Should be contains a tunnel ingress. DONE. *) RFC 3209 Does not appear in the References. (This reference is mentioned several times) DONE. *) mplsFrrConstIfIndex please rename to mplsFrrConstIfIndexOrZero DONE. *) mplsFrrConstTunnelInstance s/identication/identification DONE. *) NEW mplsFrrConstraintHopLimit According to RFC4090 this looks to be a byte, so why is there not a range on this? *) mplsFrrConstBandwidth s/reserved for detour/reserved for a detour DONE. *) MplsFrrTunARHop please use Tunnel Also, other object names use Protection or Protected so please use entire word here DONE. *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable DESCRIPTION is a little bit awkward "...that initiated the detour LSPs that traverse this node." maybe the last "that" is not needed? DONE. *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrEntry states: "...An entry in this table is only created by an SNMP agent as instructed by an MPLS signaling protocol." But there are read-create objects, so want to make sure that these read-create objects are allowed to be changed after a row has been created? DONE. Please spell out Tunnel, Ingress, Egress, Index and Instance in these names. This is to match the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. MOST DONE. Inst still being used. *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrRunIngrLSRId s/identity/identify *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrId Please add a REFERENCE clause DONE. *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddrType mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddr What does the N stand for? DONE. *) Please add REFERENCE to mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddr DONE. *) mplsFrrDetourTable Please use Tunnel, Index, Instance DONE. *) mplsFrrDetourActive Please add to the DESCRIPTION what true(1) means. DONE. *) mplsFrrDetourMerging name suggestion: mplsFrrDetourMergedStatus SYNTAX INTEGER { none(1), protectedTunnel(2), detour(3) } Could the above labels be changed to: notMerged(1), mergedWithProtectedTunnel(2) mergedWithDetour(3) DONE. *)Also the description talks of setting this, but it is a read-only. Please just get rid of the phrase "set to" NOT DONE. *) NEW, mplsFrrOne2OneDetourMergedDetourInst Same comment as above. Please just the the value is, as the phrase "set to" is confusing with read-only objects. *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable Please expand Fac to Facility, Tun to Tunnel, Idx to Index, Inst to Instance, Ingr to Ingress and Egr to Egress. Also, Prot is used but other places in this MIB spell out Protection, or Protected. DONE. Would also take out the word Route in these object names, so mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable becomes mplsFrrFacilityDBTable DONE. *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable DESCRIPTION s/mplsFrrDBTable/mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable (The above occurs in other objects of this table, so please check the DESCRIPTIONs.) DONE. The protecting tunnel is indicated by the second two indexes (mplsTunnelIndex and mplsTunnelInstance) and represents a valid mplsTunnelEntry. Note that the tunnel The above sentence is confusing. Are you saying that the second two indexes in this table have the same values as mplsTunnelIndex and mplsTunnelInstance? DONE. *) mplsFrrFacRouteProtIfIdx s/applies/apply DONE. *) mplsFrrFacRouteProtTunIdx Please add a REFERENCE clause. In general, if the DESCRIPTION specifies a reference, then there should probably be a REFERENCE clause. DONE. *) Many of the DESCRIPTIONs state: "...on the specified interface as specified in the mplsFrrFacRouteIfProtIdx." Could this be reworded as: "...on the interface specified by mplsFrrFacRouteIfProtIdx." DONE. *) mplsFrrFacDBNumProtTunOnIf Please supply the specified interface's name. DONE. *) NEW mplsFrrFacilityDBNumProtectingTunnelOnIf s/speficied/specified/ *) mplsFrrRacRouteDBNumProtLspOnIf Please supply the specified interface's name. DONE. *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunStatus Which protected tunnel is denoted here? DONE. *) Same question for mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunResvBw DONE. *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunResvBw Please specify which object (or objects) from the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB are being repeated. DONE. *) mplsFrrFacProtected The name doesn't say much about this notification. Could we think of a more descriptive name, e.g. (suggestion only) mplsFrrFacilityInitialBkupTunnelInvoked? DONE. s/network loading/network load DONE. DESCRIPTION is a little confusing. Could you just say that the notification needs to be sent prior to forwarding data ? DONE. Last paragraph: "Note this notification only applicable..." change to: Note this notification is only applicable DONE. *) mplsFrrFacUnProtected The name doesn't say much about this notification. Could we think of a more descriptive name, e.g. (suggestion only) mplsFrrFacilityFinalTunnelRestored? DONE, okay suggestion only. s/network loading/network load DONE. Last paragraph: "Note this notification only applicable..." change to: Note this notification is only applicable DONE. Conformance -------------- *) Full conformance DESCRIPTION of the one-to-one or facilty methods state: "...and is optional for those which do not." Why is it optional? Is it possible to support these objects in any meaningful way? NOT DONE. read-only Compliance ----------------------- *) Comment is misplaced since it appears before a scalar object -- mplsFrrConstTable DONE. *) Missing from Read-only conformance: mplsFrrNotifsEnabled mplsFrrNotifMaxRate mplsFrrConstSetupPrio mplsFrrconstHoldingPrio mplsFrrConstInclAnyAffinity mplsFrrConstInclAllAffinity mplsFrrConstExclAnyAffinity mplsFrrConstBandwidth mplsFrrOne2OnePlrSenderAddrType mplsFrrOne2OnePlrSenderAddr DONE. *) 7. Security Considerations configuration and/or performanc statistics. Administrators not wishing to reveal this information should consider these objects sensitive/vulnerable and take precautions so they are not revealed. s/performanc/performance DONE. *) 9. Acknowledgments Please begin this section with: This document is a product of the MPLS Working Group. NOT DONE. *) REFERENCES are not in order of RFC number NOT DONE. *) 10.1 Normative References [RFC4090] Pan, P., Swallow, G., Atlas, A., "Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels", RFC4090, May 2005. and A. Atlas, s/RFC4090/RFC 4090 DONE. *) [RFC3813] Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A. and Nadeau, T., "MPLS Label Switch Router Management Information Base ", RFC 3813, June 2004 and T. Nadeau, "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR) Management Information Base" NOT DONE. *) [RFC3291] Daniele, M., Haberman, B., Routhier, S., and J. Schoenwaelder, "TextualConventions for Internet Network Addresses", RFC 3291, May 2002. s/TextualConventions/Textual Conventions DONE (N/A). *) 10.2 Informative References *) RFC3031 should probably be Normative, it is currently listed as Informative DONE. -- end-- _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 11:27:54 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8595F28CD8D; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:27:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.018 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.419, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4F-J23WQFrLb; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:27:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2822B28C387; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:14:45 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE06428C24C; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:14:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7I5OCIWiengg; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:14:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from lucidvision.com (static-72-71-250-34.cncdnh.fios.verizon.net [72.71.250.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B0A03A6D72; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:09:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6512122A654; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:09:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from lucidvision.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 19230-06; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:08:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.120] (static-72-71-250-36.cncdnh.fios.verizon.net [72.71.250.36]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BD1222A606; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:08:59 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Nadeau To: "Joan Cucchiara" In-Reply-To: <0d6f01c8777c$50396d50$6601a8c0@JoanPC> X-Priority: 3 References: <088f01c8287f$037cd750$0db96540@cisco.com> <7661CC97-5115-4C0F-BA1D-98E0AC05A717@lucidvision.com> <0bef01c8755c$955473c0$6601a8c0@JoanPC> <5EE88370-3546-4BCD-BBF1-F8A1B0D97377@lucidvision.com> <0d6f01c8777c$50396d50$6601a8c0@JoanPC> Message-Id: <9B98E54C-4B70-4E21-BA8A-276C6AC07F7D@lucidvision.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:08:48 -0500 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at www.lucidvision.com Cc: mpls@ietf.org, "MIB Doctors \(E-mail\)" , Agrahara S Kiran Koushik Subject: Re: [mpls] MIB DR review of draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-08.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Joan, First, thanks for taking the time to go over the document again. The comments are minor except for the one I have a question/comment about below, so we will fix those in a follow on version ASAP. > MIB Dr review of draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-08.txt > > Tom, et al. > > Following are the review comments from the previous version > of the MIB. There are a few overall comments followed by > comments in order of the document. > I have indicated that the comment has been > "DONE", "NOT DONE" or if comment is > a new comment "NEW". > > Thanks, > Joan > > Overall COMMENTs > --------------- > > *) MIB compiles cleanly with smiLint and > smicngPRO. (applies to version 8) > > *) First overall comment has to do with the organization > of the MIB module itself; a better way > to represent the objects would be to have separate MIB > modules for General, One2One and Facility. Even the scalar objects > seem dependent on > which method is being used so seems that separate > MIB modules would help to clarify this. > Please comment. > NOT DONE. (Think we need to get this comment addressed > since many of the other comments marked NOT DONE are > related to this.) Sorry. I think we left this to ask the WG because it was such a major change and never got around to doing so. DOH! I will agree to breaking up the MIB into different modules if we can agree that the agent conformance statements need not be overly complex in their interactions. That is, I see three modules called: MPLS-FRR-GENERAL-STD-MIB MPLS-FRR-ONE2ONE-STD-MIB MPLS-FRR-FACILITY-STD-MIB In the latter two modules, each requires only the mandatory objects from the MPLS-FRR-GENERAL-STD-MIB. I do not want the latter two modules to require each other in any way (which is why we have a General module). Does this seem reasonable to you? --Tom > *) I tried to be very specific about this during the > commenting, but basically would ask that the names used > be consistent with the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. For example, > Tunnel, Index, Instance, Ingress, Egress and other words > are spelled out when used in an object's name, but in > this MIB Module these are abbreviated. Just looking for > some consistency with the naming conventions used in the > 2 MIBs since they are tightly coupled. > DONE but not completely. This needs to be checked throughout the > document since it is not updated consistenly, e.g. > > * Several places in the document use: mplsFrrTunARHopTable > and this table was renamed mplsFrrTunnelARHopTable so please make > this correction throughout entire document. > > > > COMMENTS ON DOC (as they appear in the doc) > --------------------------------------------- > *) Abstract: > In particular, it describes managed objects for Multiprotocol Label > Switching fast rerouting. > suggestion to specify the 2 fast reroute methods: > ...managed objects used to support two fast reroute (FRR) methods for > Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) based traffic engineering (TE). > The two methods are one-to-one backup method and facility backup > method. > DONE. > > *) Date on the page headers do not match > date of document. > DONE. > *) TOC > References is off by a space. > Also, the subsections 1.1, 4.1, 4.2 > (maybe others) are missing from the TOC. > DONE, BUT some sections have incorrect page numbers. > Also, some spacing of off. > > > *) 1. Introduction > Would add RFC3811 also, i.e. > used in conjunction with [RFC3811], [RFC3812] and > [RFC3813]. > DONE. > > *) NEW: following needs updating > s/mpls@uu.net/mpls@ietf.org/ > > > *) 2. Terminology > Should state the title of the referenced docs > here. > So > This document uses terminology defined in the > "Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture" [RFC3031] > document > and the "Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for > LSP Tunnels" [RFC4090] document. > > DONE. > > > *) 4. Brief Description of the MIB Module Objects. > s/Objects./Objects > Would retitle this section: > Overview of the MIB Module > > DONE. > *)I am confused by the term "bypass" in this section. > Are you referring to the one-to-one backup method > described in [RFC4090]? Could the terms one-to-one > and facility be used consistently? > > " The specification [RFC4090] stipulates two different > approaches to implementing MPLS TE fast reroute: bypass and > facility > backup. As such, the MIB module defined in this document" > > s/bypass/one-to-one backup/ > > NOT DONE (bypass refers to a type of tunnel, not a backup method). > "LSRs do not implement both facility and bypass methods > at the same time, the Agent Compliance section in this > module defined herein is divided into portions, one for > each method allowing any LSR to implement only the objects > applicable to the method they have implemneted." > Either correct the above statement: > s/Agent Compliance/Conformance > s/implemneted/implemented > > or reword: > "LSRs do not implement both one-to-one backup method and > facility backup method > at the same time, thus, the Conformance section specifies > conformance based on the two fast reroute methods. This allows > a developer to implement only the objects applicable to > the fast reroute method supported." > > DONE. > > > *) I would like to understand what is meant by common practice? > Is it that vendors don't support both methods at the same time, or > is it that operators don't mix these 2 methods in a network? > > > NOT DONE. Part of my confusion is the phrase "common practice has > shown that LSRs do not implement both..." Is the issue that > LSRs do not support both, or that operators choose to configure > only one method on an LSR? In other words, could you be specific > about what the common practice is? In my mind, this is important > to your justification of why the MIB is only going to allow one > kind of backup method on an LSR. > *) 4.1 mplsFrrConstTable > Please use the entire name Constraints, as in > mplsFrrConstraintsTable. > DONE, BUT TOC needs to be updated with new tabel name. > > *) 4.2 mplsFrrTunARHopTable > Please use mplsFrrTunnelARHopTable to match > with mplsTunnelARHopTable. > First sentence: > s/mplsTunnelARHop table/mplsTunnelARHopTable > DONE, BUT TOC and other places need to be updated with new table name. > > *) 4.3 mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable > > "The mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable is an optional table that contains > lists of PLRs that initiated detour LSPs to protect tunnel > instances. As such, it is only required for LSRs implementing > the detour backup method. In these cases, the detour LSPs > are reflected in the mplsFrrDetourTable." > I don't understand the above. Is this table mandatory when the > one-to-one backup method is used? If so, shouldn't that be stated. > The definition from RFC 4090 states: > "PLR: Point of Local Repair. The head-end LSR of a backup tunnel > or a detour LSP." > So the phrase "contains lists of PLRs" is confusing. > Also, the phrase "detour backup method" is confusing, are you > referring to the one-to-one backup method? > > DONE. > > 4.4 mplsFrrDetourTable > *) Could this be renamed to mplsFrrOne2OneDetourTable? > DONE, BUT TOC needs to be updated. > > *) NEW (NIT) > > "In the mplsTunnelTable, the higher 16 bits of the tunnel > instance SHOULD be used as detour instance. Note that for the > protected..." > > s/be used as/be uses as a/ > > > *) Is this table mandatory when the one-to-one backup method is > used? If so, could that be stated? > "This table is optional and is only required in case > mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable is supported." > If you state that the table is mandatory for the backup method, > then think the above statement is not necessary. > DONE. > *) 4.5 mplsFrrFacilityDBTable > > s/mplsFrrDBTable/mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable > Could this be renamed to mplsFrrFacilty > > DONE. > > *) Could you state that this table is mandatory when the > facility backup method is used? > DONE. > > > *) 5. Handling IPv6 Tunnels > > draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-addressing-03 does not appear > as a reference, please add to Normative References. > > DONE. > *) 6 (MIB MODULE) > *) LAST-UPDATED and REVISION is incorrect > > DONE. > *) NEW. Please remove the REVISION/DESCRIPTION clauses > except for the latest version of the MIB. The REVISION > clause is typically used for RFC revisions (not draft > revisions). *) DESCRIPTION: > ...This MIB module is part of RFC 4327; > see the RFC itself for full legal notices. > needs to be changed to something like > This version of this MIB module is part > of RFC xxxx; > See the RFC itself for full legal notices. > -- RFC EDITOR: please replace xxxx with actual number -- > and remove this note. > NOT DONE. > > > *) Please change to yyy > ::= { mplsStdMIB yyy } -- RFC-editor please fill in > -- yyy with value assigned by IANA, > -- see section 18.1 for details > > DONE. > > *) Please change > mplsFrrNotif to mplsFrrNotifications > > DONE. > *) Doesn't seem necessary to have > mplsFrrScalars OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 1 } > mplsFrrObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 2 } > Since Scalars are objects, right? > So maybe just use mplsFrrObjects > mplsFrrObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 1 } > mplsFrrConformance OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 2 } > NOT DONE. > > > *) Also, please move mplsFrrConformance under mplsFrrObjects. > > NOT DONE. > > *) As stated above, I believe this MIB should be organized in > 3 separate MIB Modules. This would help to clarify what > actually needs to be supported when using One2One or > Facility. > The following scalars seem to be dependent on the > type of backup method: > mplsFrrDetourIncoming > mplsFrrDetourOutgoing > mplsFrrDetourOriginating > mplsFrrConfIfs > mplsFrrActProtectedIfs > mplsFrrConfProtectionTuns > mplsFrrActProtectionTuns > mplsFrrActProtectedLSPs > mplsFrrNotifsEnabled > mplsFrrNotifMaxRate > So why are these under General Objects? > DONE (sort of). The scalars which apply to one-to-one backup > or facility backup should be co-located with their respective > tables. This is just a cut-n-paste and would go a long way > to make the MIB Module more readable. > > > *) NEW the mplsFrrFacObjects name should be changed to > mplsFrrFacilityObjects. The tables use the entire word > Facility so this would be for consistency. > > *) mplsFrrProtectionMethod Scalar > should probably be moved to being the first > scalar. Also, I think an unknown(1) should be > added. The reason is that if a device has been > rebooted, due to a change from one fast reroute > method to another, and if something were misconfigured, > then it might be that the fast reroute method would be > "unknown" until a correction was made. Obviously, > "unknown" would be read-only and not settable. > Would suggest: > unknown(1), > onetooneBackup(2), > facilityBackup(3) > DONE. > > *) Last sentence > s/notified/generated/ > DONE. > > *) NEW for mplsFrrProtectedMethod > Please include in the DESCRIPTION clause what > error should be returned if the value of unknown(1) is > set. > > *) NEW, most of the DESCRIPTION clauses in the other > objects which refer to this object (mplsFrrProtectedMethod) > need to be updated (this means most of the scalars). > > > *) mplsFrrSwitchover > Should this be a Gauge32? > > DONE. > > > > *) mplsFrrNotifsEnabled. > Why is this object needed? > > NOT DONE. Please answer the question wrt > RFC3413. > > *) mplsFrrNotificationsMaxRate > Are there other objects which indicate > if events are being thrown away due to this > throttling? (Would that be useful?) > > NOT DONE. Please answer the question. I would > think such an object (or objects) would be useful > information if throttling is done. > > > *) mplsFrrDetourIncoming > Should be put with the oneToOne objects. > Should this be a Counter32 or Gauge32? > > NOT DONE. > > *)Please rename to mplsFrrIncomingDetourLSPs > DONE. > *) mplsFrrDetourOutgoing > Should be put with the oneToOne objects. > Should this be a Counter32 or Gauge32? > > NOT DONE. > > *) please rename to mplsFrrOutgoingDetourLSPs > DONE. > > > *) Could mplsFrrConfIfs be > renamed to: > mplsFrrConfiguredInterfaces > > DONE. > > *)Also, this should apply only to > facilityBackup, so could be > a Gauge32 or Counter32? > NOT DONE. > > > *) mplsFrrActProtectedIfs > What does the Act stand for? > Is this Active or Actual? > Could this be renamed to > mplsFrrActiveInterfaces/mplsFrrActualInterfaces > DONE. > > > *) mplsFrrConfProtectionsTuns > Could this be renamed > mplsFrrConfiguredBypassTunnels ? > > DONE. > > > *) NEW could DESCRIPTION say the value must be 0 > and should be ignored. > > > *) mplsFrrActProtectionTuns > Could this be renamed to > mplsFrrActiveBypassTunnels? > > DONE. > > *) NEW DESCRIPTION should say, the value must be 0 and should > be ignored. > > *) mplsFrrActProtectedLSPs > could this be renamed to: > mplsFrrActiveProtectedLSPs? > DONE. > > *) NEW DESCRIPTION should say, the value must be 0 and should > be ignored. > > *) mplsFrrConstTable > Please rename to mplsFrrConstraintsTable > > DONE. > *) mplsFrrConstEntry OBJECT-TYPE > Please add a REFERENCE clause and add the > reference from the DESCRIPTION clause to the > REFERENCE clause. > > DONE. > s/speciifed/specified > DONE. > > "contains at a tunnel ingress." > Should be contains a tunnel ingress. > DONE. > > *) RFC 3209 Does not appear in the References. > (This reference is mentioned several times) > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrConstIfIndex > please rename to mplsFrrConstIfIndexOrZero > DONE. > *) mplsFrrConstTunnelInstance > s/identication/identification > > DONE. > > *) NEW mplsFrrConstraintHopLimit > According to RFC4090 this looks to be a byte, so > why is there not a range on this? > *) mplsFrrConstBandwidth > s/reserved for detour/reserved for a detour > DONE. > > *) MplsFrrTunARHop > please use Tunnel > Also, other object names use Protection or Protected > so please use entire word here > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable > DESCRIPTION is a little bit awkward > "...that initiated the detour LSPs that traverse this node." > maybe the last "that" is not needed? > DONE. > > > *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrEntry > states: > "...An entry in > this table is only created by an SNMP agent as instructed > by an MPLS signaling protocol." > But there are read-create objects, so want to make sure > that these read-create objects are allowed to be > changed after a row has been created? > > DONE. > > Please spell out Tunnel, Ingress, Egress, Index and Instance in these > names. This is to match the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. > > MOST DONE. Inst still being used. > > > *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrRunIngrLSRId > s/identity/identify > *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrId > Please add a REFERENCE clause > DONE. > > > *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddrType > mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddr > What does the N stand for? > DONE. > > *) Please add REFERENCE to mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddr > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrDetourTable > Please use Tunnel, Index, Instance > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrDetourActive > Please add to the DESCRIPTION what true(1) means. > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrDetourMerging > name suggestion: mplsFrrDetourMergedStatus > SYNTAX INTEGER { none(1), > protectedTunnel(2), > detour(3) > } > Could the above labels be > changed to: > notMerged(1), > mergedWithProtectedTunnel(2) > mergedWithDetour(3) > DONE. > > *)Also the description talks of setting this, but > it is a read-only. > > Please just get rid of the phrase "set to" NOT DONE. > > *) NEW, mplsFrrOne2OneDetourMergedDetourInst > > Same comment as above. Please just the the value is, as > the phrase "set to" is confusing with read-only objects. > > > *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable > Please expand Fac to Facility, Tun to Tunnel, > Idx to Index, Inst to Instance, Ingr to Ingress > and Egr to Egress. Also, Prot is used but other > places in this MIB spell out Protection, or Protected. > > DONE. > > > Would also take out the word Route in these > object names, so mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable becomes > mplsFrrFacilityDBTable > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable > DESCRIPTION > s/mplsFrrDBTable/mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable > (The above occurs in other objects of this > table, so please check the DESCRIPTIONs.) > DONE. > > The protecting tunnel is indicated by the second two > indexes (mplsTunnelIndex and mplsTunnelInstance) and > represents a valid mplsTunnelEntry. Note that the tunnel > The above sentence is confusing. Are you saying that > the second two indexes in this table have the same values > as mplsTunnelIndex and mplsTunnelInstance? > DONE. > > > *) mplsFrrFacRouteProtIfIdx > s/applies/apply > > DONE. > *) mplsFrrFacRouteProtTunIdx > Please add a REFERENCE clause. In general, if the > DESCRIPTION specifies a reference, then there should > probably be a REFERENCE clause. > DONE. > > > *) Many of the DESCRIPTIONs state: > "...on the specified interface as specified in the > mplsFrrFacRouteIfProtIdx." > Could this be reworded as: > "...on the interface specified by mplsFrrFacRouteIfProtIdx." > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrFacDBNumProtTunOnIf > Please supply the specified interface's name. > DONE. > > > *) NEW mplsFrrFacilityDBNumProtectingTunnelOnIf > s/speficied/specified/ > > *) mplsFrrRacRouteDBNumProtLspOnIf > Please supply the specified interface's name. > > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunStatus > Which protected tunnel is denoted here? > DONE. > > > *) Same question for mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunResvBw > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunResvBw > Please specify which object (or objects) from > the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB are being repeated. > DONE. > > *) mplsFrrFacProtected > The name doesn't say much about this notification. > Could we think of a more descriptive name, e.g. > (suggestion only) mplsFrrFacilityInitialBkupTunnelInvoked? > DONE. > > s/network loading/network load > DONE. > > DESCRIPTION is a little confusing. > Could you just say that the notification needs to > be sent prior to forwarding data ? > > DONE. > Last paragraph: > "Note this notification only applicable..." > change to: > Note this notification is only applicable > > DONE. *) mplsFrrFacUnProtected > The name doesn't say much about this notification. > Could we think of a more descriptive name, e.g. > (suggestion only) mplsFrrFacilityFinalTunnelRestored? > DONE, okay suggestion only. > > s/network loading/network load > DONE. > > Last paragraph: > "Note this notification only applicable..." > change to: > Note this notification is only applicable > DONE. > > > Conformance > -------------- > *) Full conformance > DESCRIPTION of the one-to-one or facilty methods > state: > "...and is optional for those which do not." > Why is it optional? Is it possible to support these > objects in any meaningful way? > NOT DONE. > > > read-only Compliance > ----------------------- *) Comment is misplaced since it appears > before > a scalar object > -- mplsFrrConstTable > DONE. > > *) Missing from Read-only conformance: > mplsFrrNotifsEnabled > mplsFrrNotifMaxRate > mplsFrrConstSetupPrio > mplsFrrconstHoldingPrio > mplsFrrConstInclAnyAffinity > mplsFrrConstInclAllAffinity > mplsFrrConstExclAnyAffinity > mplsFrrConstBandwidth > mplsFrrOne2OnePlrSenderAddrType > mplsFrrOne2OnePlrSenderAddr > DONE. > > > *) 7. Security Considerations > configuration and/or performanc statistics. > Administrators not wishing to reveal this information should > consider these objects sensitive/vulnerable and take > precautions so they are not revealed. > s/performanc/performance > DONE. > > *) 9. Acknowledgments > Please begin this section with: > This document is a product of the MPLS Working Group. > NOT DONE. > > *) REFERENCES are not in order of RFC number > > NOT DONE. > > *) 10.1 Normative References > > [RFC4090] Pan, P., Swallow, G., Atlas, A., "Fast Reroute > Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels", RFC4090, > May 2005. > and A. Atlas, > s/RFC4090/RFC 4090 > DONE. > > *) [RFC3813] Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A. and Nadeau, T., > "MPLS Label Switch Router Management Information Base ", > RFC 3813, June 2004 > and T. Nadeau, > "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR) > Management Information Base" > NOT DONE. > > > > *) [RFC3291] Daniele, M., Haberman, B., Routhier, S., and J. > Schoenwaelder, "TextualConventions for Internet Network > Addresses", RFC 3291, May 2002. > s/TextualConventions/Textual Conventions > DONE (N/A). > > *) 10.2 Informative References > *) RFC3031 should probably be Normative, it is currently > listed as Informative > DONE. > -- end-- > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 12:50:52 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73F7528CBF6; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:50:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.474 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.102, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1=0.227] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y6ewFs4bv9QL; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:50:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4323328CA9C; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:15:06 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 124DE28C8AF; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:15:01 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080225201502.124DE28C8AF@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:15:02 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-mp-ldp-reqs-04.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org 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 : Requirements for Point-To-Multipoint Extensions to the Label Distribution Protocol Author(s) : J. Le Roux Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-mp-ldp-reqs-04.txt Pages : 18 Date : 2008-2-25 This document lists a set of functional requirements for Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) extensions for setting up point-to- multipoint (P2MP) Label Switched Paths (LSP), in order to deliver point-to-multipoint applications over a Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) infrastructure. It is intended that solutions that specify LDP procedures for setting up P2MP LSP satisfy these requirements. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-mp-ldp-reqs-04.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-mp-ldp-reqs-04.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 _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 13:32:59 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFF5528C858; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:32:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.073, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rlvVjZUN79pA; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:32:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4183A6DB9; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:53:24 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F23D83A6D89; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:53:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HHgBOxXeY-yd; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:53:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.61]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53F2728C6E9; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:42:27 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=WZnysMLmuFMfXOCyWzn1+s4ltw6RRzEjDaqxe1eHRYY8GYFqj6fZV2tcDq+ZdIih; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [141.154.111.86] (helo=JoanPC) by elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1JTk9R-0003QO-J5; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:42:19 -0500 Message-ID: <0e7e01c877ef$31ad7700$6601a8c0@JoanPC> From: "Joan Cucchiara" To: "Thomas Nadeau" References: <088f01c8287f$037cd750$0db96540@cisco.com> <7661CC97-5115-4C0F-BA1D-98E0AC05A717@lucidvision.com> <0bef01c8755c$955473c0$6601a8c0@JoanPC> <5EE88370-3546-4BCD-BBF1-F8A1B0D97377@lucidvision.com> <0d6f01c8777c$50396d50$6601a8c0@JoanPC> <9B98E54C-4B70-4E21-BA8A-276C6AC07F7D@lucidvision.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:44:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-ELNK-Trace: 4d68bbe9cb71969ea344cf2d1a8e60840a9da525759e2654e2ca0e362cdaaecdbc01665057c9c6205af2f0520a031d2f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 141.154.111.86 Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Agrahara S Kiran Koushik , "MIB Doctors \(E-mail\)" , "Dan Romascanu \(E-mail\)" Subject: Re: [mpls] MIB DR review of draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-08.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Tom, > > Hi Joan, > > > First, thanks for taking the time to go over the document again. The Your welcome! > comments > are minor except for the one I have a question/comment about below, so we > will > fix those in a follow on version ASAP. > >> MIB Dr review of draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-08.txt >> >> Tom, et al. >> >> Following are the review comments from the previous version >> of the MIB. There are a few overall comments followed by >> comments in order of the document. >> I have indicated that the comment has been >> "DONE", "NOT DONE" or if comment is >> a new comment "NEW". >> >> Thanks, >> Joan >> >> Overall COMMENTs >> --------------- >> >> *) MIB compiles cleanly with smiLint and >> smicngPRO. (applies to version 8) >> >> *) First overall comment has to do with the organization >> of the MIB module itself; a better way >> to represent the objects would be to have separate MIB >> modules for General, One2One and Facility. Even the scalar objects seem >> dependent on >> which method is being used so seems that separate >> MIB modules would help to clarify this. >> Please comment. >> NOT DONE. (Think we need to get this comment addressed >> since many of the other comments marked NOT DONE are >> related to this.) > > Sorry. I think we left this to ask the WG because it was such a major > change > and never got around to doing so. DOH! > > I will agree to breaking up the MIB into different modules if we can > agree > that the agent conformance statements need not be overly complex in their > interactions. > That is, I see three modules called: > > MPLS-FRR-GENERAL-STD-MIB MPLS-FRR-ONE2ONE-STD-MIB > MPLS-FRR-FACILITY-STD-MIB > In the latter two modules, each requires only the mandatory objects > from the MPLS-FRR-GENERAL-STD-MIB. I do not want the latter two modules > to > require each other in any way (which is why we have a General module). > > Does this seem reasonable to you? This seems reasonable as long as the scalars which are related to a specific method are included in the appropriate MIB Module for that specific method (Also, the scalars need to be edited so that they apply only to their specific method as described in the comments below), then yes, I think this would be the best approach. Thanks, Joan > > --Tom > > > >> *) I tried to be very specific about this during the >> commenting, but basically would ask that the names used >> be consistent with the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. For example, >> Tunnel, Index, Instance, Ingress, Egress and other words >> are spelled out when used in an object's name, but in >> this MIB Module these are abbreviated. Just looking for >> some consistency with the naming conventions used in the >> 2 MIBs since they are tightly coupled. >> DONE but not completely. This needs to be checked throughout the >> document since it is not updated consistenly, e.g. >> >> * Several places in the document use: mplsFrrTunARHopTable >> and this table was renamed mplsFrrTunnelARHopTable so please make this >> correction throughout entire document. >> >> >> >> COMMENTS ON DOC (as they appear in the doc) >> --------------------------------------------- >> *) Abstract: >> In particular, it describes managed objects for Multiprotocol Label >> Switching fast rerouting. >> suggestion to specify the 2 fast reroute methods: >> ...managed objects used to support two fast reroute (FRR) methods for >> Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) based traffic engineering (TE). >> The two methods are one-to-one backup method and facility backup >> method. >> DONE. >> >> *) Date on the page headers do not match >> date of document. >> DONE. >> *) TOC >> References is off by a space. >> Also, the subsections 1.1, 4.1, 4.2 >> (maybe others) are missing from the TOC. >> DONE, BUT some sections have incorrect page numbers. >> Also, some spacing of off. >> >> >> *) 1. Introduction >> Would add RFC3811 also, i.e. >> used in conjunction with [RFC3811], [RFC3812] and >> [RFC3813]. >> DONE. >> >> *) NEW: following needs updating >> s/mpls@uu.net/mpls@ietf.org/ >> >> >> *) 2. Terminology >> Should state the title of the referenced docs >> here. >> So >> This document uses terminology defined in the >> "Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture" [RFC3031] >> document >> and the "Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for >> LSP Tunnels" [RFC4090] document. >> >> DONE. >> >> >> *) 4. Brief Description of the MIB Module Objects. >> s/Objects./Objects >> Would retitle this section: >> Overview of the MIB Module >> >> DONE. >> *)I am confused by the term "bypass" in this section. >> Are you referring to the one-to-one backup method >> described in [RFC4090]? Could the terms one-to-one >> and facility be used consistently? >> >> " The specification [RFC4090] stipulates two different approaches to >> implementing MPLS TE fast reroute: bypass and facility >> backup. As such, the MIB module defined in this document" >> >> s/bypass/one-to-one backup/ >> >> NOT DONE (bypass refers to a type of tunnel, not a backup method). >> "LSRs do not implement both facility and bypass methods >> at the same time, the Agent Compliance section in this >> module defined herein is divided into portions, one for >> each method allowing any LSR to implement only the objects >> applicable to the method they have implemneted." >> Either correct the above statement: >> s/Agent Compliance/Conformance >> s/implemneted/implemented >> >> or reword: >> "LSRs do not implement both one-to-one backup method and >> facility backup method >> at the same time, thus, the Conformance section specifies >> conformance based on the two fast reroute methods. This allows >> a developer to implement only the objects applicable to >> the fast reroute method supported." >> >> DONE. >> >> >> *) I would like to understand what is meant by common practice? >> Is it that vendors don't support both methods at the same time, or >> is it that operators don't mix these 2 methods in a network? >> >> >> NOT DONE. Part of my confusion is the phrase "common practice has shown >> that LSRs do not implement both..." Is the issue that >> LSRs do not support both, or that operators choose to configure >> only one method on an LSR? In other words, could you be specific >> about what the common practice is? In my mind, this is important >> to your justification of why the MIB is only going to allow one >> kind of backup method on an LSR. >> *) 4.1 mplsFrrConstTable >> Please use the entire name Constraints, as in >> mplsFrrConstraintsTable. >> DONE, BUT TOC needs to be updated with new tabel name. >> >> *) 4.2 mplsFrrTunARHopTable >> Please use mplsFrrTunnelARHopTable to match >> with mplsTunnelARHopTable. >> First sentence: >> s/mplsTunnelARHop table/mplsTunnelARHopTable >> DONE, BUT TOC and other places need to be updated with new table name. >> >> *) 4.3 mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable >> >> "The mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable is an optional table that contains >> lists of PLRs that initiated detour LSPs to protect tunnel >> instances. As such, it is only required for LSRs implementing >> the detour backup method. In these cases, the detour LSPs >> are reflected in the mplsFrrDetourTable." >> I don't understand the above. Is this table mandatory when the >> one-to-one backup method is used? If so, shouldn't that be stated. >> The definition from RFC 4090 states: >> "PLR: Point of Local Repair. The head-end LSR of a backup tunnel >> or a detour LSP." >> So the phrase "contains lists of PLRs" is confusing. >> Also, the phrase "detour backup method" is confusing, are you >> referring to the one-to-one backup method? >> >> DONE. >> >> 4.4 mplsFrrDetourTable >> *) Could this be renamed to mplsFrrOne2OneDetourTable? >> DONE, BUT TOC needs to be updated. >> >> *) NEW (NIT) >> >> "In the mplsTunnelTable, the higher 16 bits of the tunnel instance >> SHOULD be used as detour instance. Note that for the protected..." >> >> s/be used as/be uses as a/ >> >> >> *) Is this table mandatory when the one-to-one backup method is >> used? If so, could that be stated? >> "This table is optional and is only required in case >> mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable is supported." >> If you state that the table is mandatory for the backup method, >> then think the above statement is not necessary. >> DONE. >> *) 4.5 mplsFrrFacilityDBTable >> >> s/mplsFrrDBTable/mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable >> Could this be renamed to mplsFrrFacilty >> >> DONE. >> >> *) Could you state that this table is mandatory when the >> facility backup method is used? >> DONE. >> >> >> *) 5. Handling IPv6 Tunnels >> >> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-addressing-03 does not appear >> as a reference, please add to Normative References. >> >> DONE. >> *) 6 (MIB MODULE) >> *) LAST-UPDATED and REVISION is incorrect >> >> DONE. >> *) NEW. Please remove the REVISION/DESCRIPTION clauses >> except for the latest version of the MIB. The REVISION >> clause is typically used for RFC revisions (not draft >> revisions). *) DESCRIPTION: >> ...This MIB module is part of RFC 4327; >> see the RFC itself for full legal notices. >> needs to be changed to something like >> This version of this MIB module is part of >> RFC xxxx; >> See the RFC itself for full legal notices. >> -- RFC EDITOR: please replace xxxx with actual number -- and >> remove this note. >> NOT DONE. >> >> >> *) Please change to yyy >> ::= { mplsStdMIB yyy } -- RFC-editor please fill in >> -- yyy with value assigned by IANA, >> -- see section 18.1 for details >> >> DONE. >> >> *) Please change >> mplsFrrNotif to mplsFrrNotifications >> >> DONE. >> *) Doesn't seem necessary to have >> mplsFrrScalars OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 1 } >> mplsFrrObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 2 } >> Since Scalars are objects, right? >> So maybe just use mplsFrrObjects >> mplsFrrObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 1 } >> mplsFrrConformance OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 2 } >> NOT DONE. >> >> >> *) Also, please move mplsFrrConformance under mplsFrrObjects. >> >> NOT DONE. >> >> *) As stated above, I believe this MIB should be organized in >> 3 separate MIB Modules. This would help to clarify what >> actually needs to be supported when using One2One or >> Facility. >> The following scalars seem to be dependent on the >> type of backup method: >> mplsFrrDetourIncoming >> mplsFrrDetourOutgoing >> mplsFrrDetourOriginating >> mplsFrrConfIfs >> mplsFrrActProtectedIfs >> mplsFrrConfProtectionTuns >> mplsFrrActProtectionTuns >> mplsFrrActProtectedLSPs >> mplsFrrNotifsEnabled >> mplsFrrNotifMaxRate >> So why are these under General Objects? >> DONE (sort of). The scalars which apply to one-to-one backup >> or facility backup should be co-located with their respective >> tables. This is just a cut-n-paste and would go a long way >> to make the MIB Module more readable. >> >> >> *) NEW the mplsFrrFacObjects name should be changed to >> mplsFrrFacilityObjects. The tables use the entire word >> Facility so this would be for consistency. >> >> *) mplsFrrProtectionMethod Scalar >> should probably be moved to being the first >> scalar. Also, I think an unknown(1) should be >> added. The reason is that if a device has been >> rebooted, due to a change from one fast reroute >> method to another, and if something were misconfigured, >> then it might be that the fast reroute method would be >> "unknown" until a correction was made. Obviously, >> "unknown" would be read-only and not settable. >> Would suggest: >> unknown(1), >> onetooneBackup(2), >> facilityBackup(3) >> DONE. >> >> *) Last sentence >> s/notified/generated/ >> DONE. >> >> *) NEW for mplsFrrProtectedMethod >> Please include in the DESCRIPTION clause what >> error should be returned if the value of unknown(1) is >> set. >> >> *) NEW, most of the DESCRIPTION clauses in the other >> objects which refer to this object (mplsFrrProtectedMethod) >> need to be updated (this means most of the scalars). >> >> >> *) mplsFrrSwitchover >> Should this be a Gauge32? >> >> DONE. >> >> >> >> *) mplsFrrNotifsEnabled. >> Why is this object needed? >> >> NOT DONE. Please answer the question wrt >> RFC3413. >> >> *) mplsFrrNotificationsMaxRate >> Are there other objects which indicate >> if events are being thrown away due to this >> throttling? (Would that be useful?) >> >> NOT DONE. Please answer the question. I would >> think such an object (or objects) would be useful >> information if throttling is done. >> >> >> *) mplsFrrDetourIncoming >> Should be put with the oneToOne objects. >> Should this be a Counter32 or Gauge32? >> >> NOT DONE. >> >> *)Please rename to mplsFrrIncomingDetourLSPs >> DONE. >> *) mplsFrrDetourOutgoing >> Should be put with the oneToOne objects. >> Should this be a Counter32 or Gauge32? >> >> NOT DONE. >> >> *) please rename to mplsFrrOutgoingDetourLSPs >> DONE. >> >> >> *) Could mplsFrrConfIfs be >> renamed to: >> mplsFrrConfiguredInterfaces >> >> DONE. >> >> *)Also, this should apply only to >> facilityBackup, so could be >> a Gauge32 or Counter32? >> NOT DONE. >> >> >> *) mplsFrrActProtectedIfs >> What does the Act stand for? >> Is this Active or Actual? >> Could this be renamed to >> mplsFrrActiveInterfaces/mplsFrrActualInterfaces >> DONE. >> >> >> *) mplsFrrConfProtectionsTuns >> Could this be renamed >> mplsFrrConfiguredBypassTunnels ? >> >> DONE. >> >> >> *) NEW could DESCRIPTION say the value must be 0 >> and should be ignored. >> >> >> *) mplsFrrActProtectionTuns >> Could this be renamed to >> mplsFrrActiveBypassTunnels? >> >> DONE. >> >> *) NEW DESCRIPTION should say, the value must be 0 and should >> be ignored. >> >> *) mplsFrrActProtectedLSPs >> could this be renamed to: >> mplsFrrActiveProtectedLSPs? >> DONE. >> >> *) NEW DESCRIPTION should say, the value must be 0 and should >> be ignored. >> >> *) mplsFrrConstTable >> Please rename to mplsFrrConstraintsTable >> >> DONE. >> *) mplsFrrConstEntry OBJECT-TYPE >> Please add a REFERENCE clause and add the >> reference from the DESCRIPTION clause to the >> REFERENCE clause. >> >> DONE. >> s/speciifed/specified >> DONE. >> >> "contains at a tunnel ingress." >> Should be contains a tunnel ingress. >> DONE. >> >> *) RFC 3209 Does not appear in the References. >> (This reference is mentioned several times) >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrConstIfIndex >> please rename to mplsFrrConstIfIndexOrZero >> DONE. >> *) mplsFrrConstTunnelInstance >> s/identication/identification >> >> DONE. >> >> *) NEW mplsFrrConstraintHopLimit >> According to RFC4090 this looks to be a byte, so >> why is there not a range on this? >> *) mplsFrrConstBandwidth >> s/reserved for detour/reserved for a detour >> DONE. >> >> *) MplsFrrTunARHop >> please use Tunnel >> Also, other object names use Protection or Protected >> so please use entire word here >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable >> DESCRIPTION is a little bit awkward >> "...that initiated the detour LSPs that traverse this node." >> maybe the last "that" is not needed? >> DONE. >> >> >> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrEntry >> states: >> "...An entry in >> this table is only created by an SNMP agent as instructed >> by an MPLS signaling protocol." >> But there are read-create objects, so want to make sure >> that these read-create objects are allowed to be >> changed after a row has been created? >> >> DONE. >> >> Please spell out Tunnel, Ingress, Egress, Index and Instance in these >> names. This is to match the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. >> >> MOST DONE. Inst still being used. >> >> >> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrRunIngrLSRId >> s/identity/identify >> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrId >> Please add a REFERENCE clause >> DONE. >> >> >> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddrType >> mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddr >> What does the N stand for? >> DONE. >> >> *) Please add REFERENCE to mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddr >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrDetourTable >> Please use Tunnel, Index, Instance >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrDetourActive >> Please add to the DESCRIPTION what true(1) means. >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrDetourMerging >> name suggestion: mplsFrrDetourMergedStatus >> SYNTAX INTEGER { none(1), >> protectedTunnel(2), >> detour(3) >> } >> Could the above labels be >> changed to: >> notMerged(1), >> mergedWithProtectedTunnel(2) >> mergedWithDetour(3) >> DONE. >> >> *)Also the description talks of setting this, but >> it is a read-only. >> >> Please just get rid of the phrase "set to" NOT DONE. >> >> *) NEW, mplsFrrOne2OneDetourMergedDetourInst >> >> Same comment as above. Please just the the value is, as >> the phrase "set to" is confusing with read-only objects. >> >> >> *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable >> Please expand Fac to Facility, Tun to Tunnel, >> Idx to Index, Inst to Instance, Ingr to Ingress >> and Egr to Egress. Also, Prot is used but other >> places in this MIB spell out Protection, or Protected. >> >> DONE. >> >> >> Would also take out the word Route in these >> object names, so mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable becomes >> mplsFrrFacilityDBTable >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable >> DESCRIPTION >> s/mplsFrrDBTable/mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable >> (The above occurs in other objects of this >> table, so please check the DESCRIPTIONs.) >> DONE. >> >> The protecting tunnel is indicated by the second two >> indexes (mplsTunnelIndex and mplsTunnelInstance) and >> represents a valid mplsTunnelEntry. Note that the tunnel >> The above sentence is confusing. Are you saying that >> the second two indexes in this table have the same values >> as mplsTunnelIndex and mplsTunnelInstance? >> DONE. >> >> >> *) mplsFrrFacRouteProtIfIdx >> s/applies/apply >> >> DONE. >> *) mplsFrrFacRouteProtTunIdx >> Please add a REFERENCE clause. In general, if the >> DESCRIPTION specifies a reference, then there should >> probably be a REFERENCE clause. >> DONE. >> >> >> *) Many of the DESCRIPTIONs state: >> "...on the specified interface as specified in the >> mplsFrrFacRouteIfProtIdx." >> Could this be reworded as: >> "...on the interface specified by mplsFrrFacRouteIfProtIdx." >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrFacDBNumProtTunOnIf >> Please supply the specified interface's name. >> DONE. >> >> >> *) NEW mplsFrrFacilityDBNumProtectingTunnelOnIf >> s/speficied/specified/ >> >> *) mplsFrrRacRouteDBNumProtLspOnIf >> Please supply the specified interface's name. >> >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunStatus >> Which protected tunnel is denoted here? >> DONE. >> >> >> *) Same question for mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunResvBw >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunResvBw >> Please specify which object (or objects) from >> the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB are being repeated. >> DONE. >> >> *) mplsFrrFacProtected >> The name doesn't say much about this notification. >> Could we think of a more descriptive name, e.g. >> (suggestion only) mplsFrrFacilityInitialBkupTunnelInvoked? >> DONE. >> >> s/network loading/network load >> DONE. >> >> DESCRIPTION is a little confusing. >> Could you just say that the notification needs to >> be sent prior to forwarding data ? >> >> DONE. >> Last paragraph: >> "Note this notification only applicable..." >> change to: >> Note this notification is only applicable >> >> DONE. *) mplsFrrFacUnProtected >> The name doesn't say much about this notification. >> Could we think of a more descriptive name, e.g. >> (suggestion only) mplsFrrFacilityFinalTunnelRestored? >> DONE, okay suggestion only. >> >> s/network loading/network load >> DONE. >> >> Last paragraph: >> "Note this notification only applicable..." >> change to: >> Note this notification is only applicable >> DONE. >> >> >> Conformance >> -------------- >> *) Full conformance >> DESCRIPTION of the one-to-one or facilty methods >> state: >> "...and is optional for those which do not." >> Why is it optional? Is it possible to support these >> objects in any meaningful way? >> NOT DONE. >> >> >> read-only Compliance >> ----------------------- *) Comment is misplaced since it appears before >> a scalar object >> -- mplsFrrConstTable >> DONE. >> >> *) Missing from Read-only conformance: >> mplsFrrNotifsEnabled >> mplsFrrNotifMaxRate >> mplsFrrConstSetupPrio >> mplsFrrconstHoldingPrio >> mplsFrrConstInclAnyAffinity >> mplsFrrConstInclAllAffinity >> mplsFrrConstExclAnyAffinity >> mplsFrrConstBandwidth >> mplsFrrOne2OnePlrSenderAddrType >> mplsFrrOne2OnePlrSenderAddr >> DONE. >> >> >> *) 7. Security Considerations >> configuration and/or performanc statistics. >> Administrators not wishing to reveal this information should >> consider these objects sensitive/vulnerable and take >> precautions so they are not revealed. >> s/performanc/performance >> DONE. >> >> *) 9. Acknowledgments >> Please begin this section with: >> This document is a product of the MPLS Working Group. >> NOT DONE. >> >> *) REFERENCES are not in order of RFC number >> >> NOT DONE. >> >> *) 10.1 Normative References >> >> [RFC4090] Pan, P., Swallow, G., Atlas, A., "Fast Reroute >> Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels", RFC4090, >> May 2005. >> and A. Atlas, >> s/RFC4090/RFC 4090 >> DONE. >> >> *) [RFC3813] Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A. and Nadeau, T., >> "MPLS Label Switch Router Management Information Base ", >> RFC 3813, June 2004 >> and T. Nadeau, >> "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR) >> Management Information Base" >> NOT DONE. >> >> >> >> *) [RFC3291] Daniele, M., Haberman, B., Routhier, S., and J. >> Schoenwaelder, "TextualConventions for Internet Network >> Addresses", RFC 3291, May 2002. >> s/TextualConventions/Textual Conventions >> DONE (N/A). >> >> *) 10.2 Informative References >> *) RFC3031 should probably be Normative, it is currently >> listed as Informative >> DONE. >> -- end-- >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 13:55:27 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F359D28D2AB; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:55:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.588 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.588 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.011, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vH72iHv8yThV; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:55:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7629028CC1C; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:30:10 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id CEEB73A6DEC; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:30:01 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080225213001.CEEB73A6DEC@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:30:01 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework-02.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org 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 : Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS Networks Author(s) : L. Fang Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework-02.txt Pages : 57 Date : 2008-2-25 This document provides a security framework for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Networks (MPLS and GMPLS are described in [RFC3031] and [RFC3945]). This document addresses the security aspects that are relevant in the context of MPLS and GMPLS. It describes the security threats, the related defensive techniques, and the mechanisms for detection and reporting. This document emphasizes RSVP-TE and LDP security considerations, as well as Inter-AS and Inter-provider security considerations for building and maintaining MPLS and GMPLS networks across different domains or different Service Providers. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework-02.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework-02.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 _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 15:09:46 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F43728D8E4 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:09:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.317 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.317 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.120, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ndt9ZPCBQSzQ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:09:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D9728C661; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:19:24 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE5E328C642; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:19:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oVv8Y2ZfQ3Su; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:19:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from lucidvision.com (static-72-71-250-34.cncdnh.fios.verizon.net [72.71.250.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D39F128CA49; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:10:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E79122B4AA; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:10:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from lucidvision.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20318-01; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:09:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.120] (static-72-71-250-36.cncdnh.fios.verizon.net [72.71.250.36]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D709422B478; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:09:54 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Nadeau To: "Joan Cucchiara" In-Reply-To: <0e7e01c877ef$31ad7700$6601a8c0@JoanPC> X-Priority: 3 References: <088f01c8287f$037cd750$0db96540@cisco.com> <7661CC97-5115-4C0F-BA1D-98E0AC05A717@lucidvision.com> <0bef01c8755c$955473c0$6601a8c0@JoanPC> <5EE88370-3546-4BCD-BBF1-F8A1B0D97377@lucidvision.com> <0d6f01c8777c$50396d50$6601a8c0@JoanPC> <9B98E54C-4B70-4E21-BA8A-276C6AC07F7D@lucidvision.com> <0e7e01c877ef$31ad7700$6601a8c0@JoanPC> Message-Id: <5D3F8ED1-FE84-4A60-9822-0C5BCD7060B5@lucidvision.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:09:43 -0500 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at www.lucidvision.com Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Agrahara S Kiran Koushik , "MIB Doctors \(E-mail\)" , "Dan Romascanu \(E-mail\)" Subject: Re: [mpls] MIB DR review of draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-08.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org On Feb 25, 2008, at 3:44 PM, Joan Cucchiara wrote: > > Hi Tom, > >> >> Hi Joan, >> >> >> First, thanks for taking the time to go over the document again. The > > Your welcome! > >> comments >> are minor except for the one I have a question/comment about below, >> so we will >> fix those in a follow on version ASAP. >> >>> MIB Dr review of draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-08.txt >>> >>> Tom, et al. >>> >>> Following are the review comments from the previous version >>> of the MIB. There are a few overall comments followed by >>> comments in order of the document. >>> I have indicated that the comment has been >>> "DONE", "NOT DONE" or if comment is >>> a new comment "NEW". >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Joan >>> >>> Overall COMMENTs >>> --------------- >>> >>> *) MIB compiles cleanly with smiLint and >>> smicngPRO. (applies to version 8) >>> >>> *) First overall comment has to do with the organization >>> of the MIB module itself; a better way >>> to represent the objects would be to have separate MIB >>> modules for General, One2One and Facility. Even the scalar >>> objects seem dependent on >>> which method is being used so seems that separate >>> MIB modules would help to clarify this. >>> Please comment. >>> NOT DONE. (Think we need to get this comment addressed >>> since many of the other comments marked NOT DONE are >>> related to this.) >> >> Sorry. I think we left this to ask the WG because it was such a >> major change >> and never got around to doing so. DOH! >> >> I will agree to breaking up the MIB into different modules if we >> can agree >> that the agent conformance statements need not be overly complex >> in their interactions. >> That is, I see three modules called: >> >> MPLS-FRR-GENERAL-STD-MIB MPLS-FRR-ONE2ONE-STD-MIB MPLS-FRR-FACILITY- >> STD-MIB >> In the latter two modules, each requires only the mandatory objects >> from the MPLS-FRR-GENERAL-STD-MIB. I do not want the latter two >> modules to >> require each other in any way (which is why we have a General >> module). >> >> Does this seem reasonable to you? > > This seems reasonable as long as the scalars which are related to > a specific method are included in the appropriate MIB Module for > that specific method > (Also, the scalars need to be edited so that they apply only to > their specific method > as described in the comments below), then yes, I think this would be > the best approach. Cool. Then in effect, we will have 3 separate modules. The only thing I need to double-check is if any scalars are included within notifications, which might cause some headaches. I will try to turn around a new revision in a few weeks when I get some time with Kiran. --Tom > > > Thanks, > Joan > > > >> >> --Tom >> >> >> >>> *) I tried to be very specific about this during the >>> commenting, but basically would ask that the names used >>> be consistent with the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. For example, >>> Tunnel, Index, Instance, Ingress, Egress and other words >>> are spelled out when used in an object's name, but in >>> this MIB Module these are abbreviated. Just looking for >>> some consistency with the naming conventions used in the >>> 2 MIBs since they are tightly coupled. >>> DONE but not completely. This needs to be checked throughout the >>> document since it is not updated consistenly, e.g. >>> >>> * Several places in the document use: mplsFrrTunARHopTable >>> and this table was renamed mplsFrrTunnelARHopTable so please make >>> this correction throughout entire document. >>> >>> >>> >>> COMMENTS ON DOC (as they appear in the doc) >>> --------------------------------------------- >>> *) Abstract: >>> In particular, it describes managed objects for Multiprotocol Label >>> Switching fast rerouting. >>> suggestion to specify the 2 fast reroute methods: >>> ...managed objects used to support two fast reroute (FRR) methods >>> for >>> Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) based traffic engineering (TE). >>> The two methods are one-to-one backup method and facility backup >>> method. >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) Date on the page headers do not match >>> date of document. >>> DONE. >>> *) TOC >>> References is off by a space. >>> Also, the subsections 1.1, 4.1, 4.2 >>> (maybe others) are missing from the TOC. >>> DONE, BUT some sections have incorrect page numbers. >>> Also, some spacing of off. >>> >>> >>> *) 1. Introduction >>> Would add RFC3811 also, i.e. >>> used in conjunction with [RFC3811], [RFC3812] and >>> [RFC3813]. >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) NEW: following needs updating >>> s/mpls@uu.net/mpls@ietf.org/ >>> >>> >>> *) 2. Terminology >>> Should state the title of the referenced docs >>> here. >>> So >>> This document uses terminology defined in the >>> "Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture" [RFC3031] >>> document >>> and the "Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for >>> LSP Tunnels" [RFC4090] document. >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) 4. Brief Description of the MIB Module Objects. >>> s/Objects./Objects >>> Would retitle this section: >>> Overview of the MIB Module >>> >>> DONE. >>> *)I am confused by the term "bypass" in this section. >>> Are you referring to the one-to-one backup method >>> described in [RFC4090]? Could the terms one-to-one >>> and facility be used consistently? >>> >>> " The specification [RFC4090] stipulates two different >>> approaches to implementing MPLS TE fast reroute: bypass and >>> facility >>> backup. As such, the MIB module defined in this document" >>> >>> s/bypass/one-to-one backup/ >>> >>> NOT DONE (bypass refers to a type of tunnel, not a backup method). >>> "LSRs do not implement both facility and bypass methods >>> at the same time, the Agent Compliance section in this >>> module defined herein is divided into portions, one for >>> each method allowing any LSR to implement only the objects >>> applicable to the method they have implemneted." >>> Either correct the above statement: >>> s/Agent Compliance/Conformance >>> s/implemneted/implemented >>> >>> or reword: >>> "LSRs do not implement both one-to-one backup method and >>> facility backup method >>> at the same time, thus, the Conformance section specifies >>> conformance based on the two fast reroute methods. This allows >>> a developer to implement only the objects applicable to >>> the fast reroute method supported." >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) I would like to understand what is meant by common practice? >>> Is it that vendors don't support both methods at the same time, or >>> is it that operators don't mix these 2 methods in a network? >>> >>> >>> NOT DONE. Part of my confusion is the phrase "common practice has >>> shown that LSRs do not implement both..." Is the issue that >>> LSRs do not support both, or that operators choose to configure >>> only one method on an LSR? In other words, could you be specific >>> about what the common practice is? In my mind, this is important >>> to your justification of why the MIB is only going to allow one >>> kind of backup method on an LSR. >>> *) 4.1 mplsFrrConstTable >>> Please use the entire name Constraints, as in >>> mplsFrrConstraintsTable. >>> DONE, BUT TOC needs to be updated with new tabel name. >>> >>> *) 4.2 mplsFrrTunARHopTable >>> Please use mplsFrrTunnelARHopTable to match >>> with mplsTunnelARHopTable. >>> First sentence: >>> s/mplsTunnelARHop table/mplsTunnelARHopTable >>> DONE, BUT TOC and other places need to be updated with new table >>> name. >>> >>> *) 4.3 mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable >>> >>> "The mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable is an optional table that contains >>> lists of PLRs that initiated detour LSPs to protect tunnel >>> instances. As such, it is only required for LSRs implementing >>> the detour backup method. In these cases, the detour LSPs >>> are reflected in the mplsFrrDetourTable." >>> I don't understand the above. Is this table mandatory when the >>> one-to-one backup method is used? If so, shouldn't that be stated. >>> The definition from RFC 4090 states: >>> "PLR: Point of Local Repair. The head-end LSR of a backup tunnel >>> or a detour LSP." >>> So the phrase "contains lists of PLRs" is confusing. >>> Also, the phrase "detour backup method" is confusing, are you >>> referring to the one-to-one backup method? >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> 4.4 mplsFrrDetourTable >>> *) Could this be renamed to mplsFrrOne2OneDetourTable? >>> DONE, BUT TOC needs to be updated. >>> >>> *) NEW (NIT) >>> >>> "In the mplsTunnelTable, the higher 16 bits of the tunnel >>> instance SHOULD be used as detour instance. Note that for the >>> protected..." >>> >>> s/be used as/be uses as a/ >>> >>> >>> *) Is this table mandatory when the one-to-one backup method is >>> used? If so, could that be stated? >>> "This table is optional and is only required in case >>> mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable is supported." >>> If you state that the table is mandatory for the backup method, >>> then think the above statement is not necessary. >>> DONE. >>> *) 4.5 mplsFrrFacilityDBTable >>> >>> s/mplsFrrDBTable/mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable >>> Could this be renamed to mplsFrrFacilty >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) Could you state that this table is mandatory when the >>> facility backup method is used? >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) 5. Handling IPv6 Tunnels >>> >>> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-addressing-03 does not appear >>> as a reference, please add to Normative References. >>> >>> DONE. >>> *) 6 (MIB MODULE) >>> *) LAST-UPDATED and REVISION is incorrect >>> >>> DONE. >>> *) NEW. Please remove the REVISION/DESCRIPTION clauses >>> except for the latest version of the MIB. The REVISION >>> clause is typically used for RFC revisions (not draft >>> revisions). *) DESCRIPTION: >>> ...This MIB module is part of RFC 4327; >>> see the RFC itself for full legal notices. >>> needs to be changed to something like >>> This version of this MIB module is part >>> of RFC xxxx; >>> See the RFC itself for full legal notices. >>> -- RFC EDITOR: please replace xxxx with actual number -- >>> and remove this note. >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) Please change to yyy >>> ::= { mplsStdMIB yyy } -- RFC-editor please fill in >>> -- yyy with value assigned by IANA, >>> -- see section 18.1 for details >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) Please change >>> mplsFrrNotif to mplsFrrNotifications >>> >>> DONE. >>> *) Doesn't seem necessary to have >>> mplsFrrScalars OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 1 } >>> mplsFrrObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 2 } >>> Since Scalars are objects, right? >>> So maybe just use mplsFrrObjects >>> mplsFrrObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 1 } >>> mplsFrrConformance OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mplsFrrMIB 2 } >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) Also, please move mplsFrrConformance under mplsFrrObjects. >>> >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> *) As stated above, I believe this MIB should be organized in >>> 3 separate MIB Modules. This would help to clarify what >>> actually needs to be supported when using One2One or >>> Facility. >>> The following scalars seem to be dependent on the >>> type of backup method: >>> mplsFrrDetourIncoming >>> mplsFrrDetourOutgoing >>> mplsFrrDetourOriginating >>> mplsFrrConfIfs >>> mplsFrrActProtectedIfs >>> mplsFrrConfProtectionTuns >>> mplsFrrActProtectionTuns >>> mplsFrrActProtectedLSPs >>> mplsFrrNotifsEnabled >>> mplsFrrNotifMaxRate >>> So why are these under General Objects? >>> DONE (sort of). The scalars which apply to one-to-one backup >>> or facility backup should be co-located with their respective >>> tables. This is just a cut-n-paste and would go a long way >>> to make the MIB Module more readable. >>> >>> >>> *) NEW the mplsFrrFacObjects name should be changed to >>> mplsFrrFacilityObjects. The tables use the entire word >>> Facility so this would be for consistency. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrProtectionMethod Scalar >>> should probably be moved to being the first >>> scalar. Also, I think an unknown(1) should be >>> added. The reason is that if a device has been >>> rebooted, due to a change from one fast reroute >>> method to another, and if something were misconfigured, >>> then it might be that the fast reroute method would be >>> "unknown" until a correction was made. Obviously, >>> "unknown" would be read-only and not settable. >>> Would suggest: >>> unknown(1), >>> onetooneBackup(2), >>> facilityBackup(3) >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) Last sentence >>> s/notified/generated/ >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) NEW for mplsFrrProtectedMethod >>> Please include in the DESCRIPTION clause what >>> error should be returned if the value of unknown(1) is >>> set. >>> >>> *) NEW, most of the DESCRIPTION clauses in the other >>> objects which refer to this object (mplsFrrProtectedMethod) >>> need to be updated (this means most of the scalars). >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrSwitchover >>> Should this be a Gauge32? >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrNotifsEnabled. >>> Why is this object needed? >>> >>> NOT DONE. Please answer the question wrt >>> RFC3413. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrNotificationsMaxRate >>> Are there other objects which indicate >>> if events are being thrown away due to this >>> throttling? (Would that be useful?) >>> >>> NOT DONE. Please answer the question. I would >>> think such an object (or objects) would be useful >>> information if throttling is done. >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrDetourIncoming >>> Should be put with the oneToOne objects. >>> Should this be a Counter32 or Gauge32? >>> >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> *)Please rename to mplsFrrIncomingDetourLSPs >>> DONE. >>> *) mplsFrrDetourOutgoing >>> Should be put with the oneToOne objects. >>> Should this be a Counter32 or Gauge32? >>> >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> *) please rename to mplsFrrOutgoingDetourLSPs >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) Could mplsFrrConfIfs be >>> renamed to: >>> mplsFrrConfiguredInterfaces >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> *)Also, this should apply only to >>> facilityBackup, so could be >>> a Gauge32 or Counter32? >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrActProtectedIfs >>> What does the Act stand for? >>> Is this Active or Actual? >>> Could this be renamed to >>> mplsFrrActiveInterfaces/mplsFrrActualInterfaces >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrConfProtectionsTuns >>> Could this be renamed >>> mplsFrrConfiguredBypassTunnels ? >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) NEW could DESCRIPTION say the value must be 0 >>> and should be ignored. >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrActProtectionTuns >>> Could this be renamed to >>> mplsFrrActiveBypassTunnels? >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) NEW DESCRIPTION should say, the value must be 0 and should >>> be ignored. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrActProtectedLSPs >>> could this be renamed to: >>> mplsFrrActiveProtectedLSPs? >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) NEW DESCRIPTION should say, the value must be 0 and should >>> be ignored. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrConstTable >>> Please rename to mplsFrrConstraintsTable >>> >>> DONE. >>> *) mplsFrrConstEntry OBJECT-TYPE >>> Please add a REFERENCE clause and add the >>> reference from the DESCRIPTION clause to the >>> REFERENCE clause. >>> >>> DONE. >>> s/speciifed/specified >>> DONE. >>> >>> "contains at a tunnel ingress." >>> Should be contains a tunnel ingress. >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) RFC 3209 Does not appear in the References. >>> (This reference is mentioned several times) >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrConstIfIndex >>> please rename to mplsFrrConstIfIndexOrZero >>> DONE. >>> *) mplsFrrConstTunnelInstance >>> s/identication/identification >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) NEW mplsFrrConstraintHopLimit >>> According to RFC4090 this looks to be a byte, so >>> why is there not a range on this? >>> *) mplsFrrConstBandwidth >>> s/reserved for detour/reserved for a detour >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) MplsFrrTunARHop >>> please use Tunnel >>> Also, other object names use Protection or Protected >>> so please use entire word here >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrTable >>> DESCRIPTION is a little bit awkward >>> "...that initiated the detour LSPs that traverse this node." >>> maybe the last "that" is not needed? >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrEntry >>> states: >>> "...An entry in >>> this table is only created by an SNMP agent as instructed >>> by an MPLS signaling protocol." >>> But there are read-create objects, so want to make sure >>> that these read-create objects are allowed to be >>> changed after a row has been created? >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> Please spell out Tunnel, Ingress, Egress, Index and Instance in >>> these >>> names. This is to match the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB. >>> >>> MOST DONE. Inst still being used. >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrRunIngrLSRId >>> s/identity/identify >>> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrId >>> Please add a REFERENCE clause >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddrType >>> mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddr >>> What does the N stand for? >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) Please add REFERENCE to mplsFrrOne2OnePlrAvoidNAddr >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrDetourTable >>> Please use Tunnel, Index, Instance >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrDetourActive >>> Please add to the DESCRIPTION what true(1) means. >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrDetourMerging >>> name suggestion: mplsFrrDetourMergedStatus >>> SYNTAX INTEGER { none(1), >>> protectedTunnel(2), >>> detour(3) >>> } >>> Could the above labels be >>> changed to: >>> notMerged(1), >>> mergedWithProtectedTunnel(2) >>> mergedWithDetour(3) >>> DONE. >>> >>> *)Also the description talks of setting this, but >>> it is a read-only. >>> >>> Please just get rid of the phrase "set to" NOT DONE. >>> >>> *) NEW, mplsFrrOne2OneDetourMergedDetourInst >>> >>> Same comment as above. Please just the the value is, as >>> the phrase "set to" is confusing with read-only objects. >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable >>> Please expand Fac to Facility, Tun to Tunnel, >>> Idx to Index, Inst to Instance, Ingr to Ingress >>> and Egr to Egress. Also, Prot is used but other >>> places in this MIB spell out Protection, or Protected. >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> Would also take out the word Route in these >>> object names, so mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable becomes >>> mplsFrrFacilityDBTable >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable >>> DESCRIPTION >>> s/mplsFrrDBTable/mplsFrrFacRouteDBTable >>> (The above occurs in other objects of this >>> table, so please check the DESCRIPTIONs.) >>> DONE. >>> >>> The protecting tunnel is indicated by the second two >>> indexes (mplsTunnelIndex and mplsTunnelInstance) and >>> represents a valid mplsTunnelEntry. Note that the tunnel >>> The above sentence is confusing. Are you saying that >>> the second two indexes in this table have the same values >>> as mplsTunnelIndex and mplsTunnelInstance? >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) mplsFrrFacRouteProtIfIdx >>> s/applies/apply >>> >>> DONE. >>> *) mplsFrrFacRouteProtTunIdx >>> Please add a REFERENCE clause. In general, if the >>> DESCRIPTION specifies a reference, then there should >>> probably be a REFERENCE clause. >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) Many of the DESCRIPTIONs state: >>> "...on the specified interface as specified in the >>> mplsFrrFacRouteIfProtIdx." >>> Could this be reworded as: >>> "...on the interface specified by mplsFrrFacRouteIfProtIdx." >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrFacDBNumProtTunOnIf >>> Please supply the specified interface's name. >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) NEW mplsFrrFacilityDBNumProtectingTunnelOnIf >>> s/speficied/specified/ >>> >>> *) mplsFrrRacRouteDBNumProtLspOnIf >>> Please supply the specified interface's name. >>> >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunStatus >>> Which protected tunnel is denoted here? >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) Same question for mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunResvBw >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrFacRouteDBProtTunResvBw >>> Please specify which object (or objects) from >>> the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB are being repeated. >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) mplsFrrFacProtected >>> The name doesn't say much about this notification. >>> Could we think of a more descriptive name, e.g. >>> (suggestion only) mplsFrrFacilityInitialBkupTunnelInvoked? >>> DONE. >>> >>> s/network loading/network load >>> DONE. >>> >>> DESCRIPTION is a little confusing. >>> Could you just say that the notification needs to >>> be sent prior to forwarding data ? >>> >>> DONE. >>> Last paragraph: >>> "Note this notification only applicable..." >>> change to: >>> Note this notification is only applicable >>> >>> DONE. *) mplsFrrFacUnProtected >>> The name doesn't say much about this notification. >>> Could we think of a more descriptive name, e.g. >>> (suggestion only) mplsFrrFacilityFinalTunnelRestored? >>> DONE, okay suggestion only. >>> >>> s/network loading/network load >>> DONE. >>> >>> Last paragraph: >>> "Note this notification only applicable..." >>> change to: >>> Note this notification is only applicable >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> Conformance >>> -------------- >>> *) Full conformance >>> DESCRIPTION of the one-to-one or facilty methods >>> state: >>> "...and is optional for those which do not." >>> Why is it optional? Is it possible to support these >>> objects in any meaningful way? >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> >>> read-only Compliance >>> ----------------------- *) Comment is misplaced since it appears >>> before >>> a scalar object >>> -- mplsFrrConstTable >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) Missing from Read-only conformance: >>> mplsFrrNotifsEnabled >>> mplsFrrNotifMaxRate >>> mplsFrrConstSetupPrio >>> mplsFrrconstHoldingPrio >>> mplsFrrConstInclAnyAffinity >>> mplsFrrConstInclAllAffinity >>> mplsFrrConstExclAnyAffinity >>> mplsFrrConstBandwidth >>> mplsFrrOne2OnePlrSenderAddrType >>> mplsFrrOne2OnePlrSenderAddr >>> DONE. >>> >>> >>> *) 7. Security Considerations >>> configuration and/or performanc statistics. >>> Administrators not wishing to reveal this information should >>> consider these objects sensitive/vulnerable and take >>> precautions so they are not revealed. >>> s/performanc/performance >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) 9. Acknowledgments >>> Please begin this section with: >>> This document is a product of the MPLS Working Group. >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> *) REFERENCES are not in order of RFC number >>> >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> *) 10.1 Normative References >>> >>> [RFC4090] Pan, P., Swallow, G., Atlas, A., "Fast Reroute >>> Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels", RFC4090, >>> May 2005. >>> and A. Atlas, >>> s/RFC4090/RFC 4090 >>> DONE. >>> >>> *) [RFC3813] Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A. and Nadeau, T., >>> "MPLS Label Switch Router Management Information Base ", >>> RFC 3813, June 2004 >>> and T. Nadeau, >>> "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR) >>> Management Information Base" >>> NOT DONE. >>> >>> >>> >>> *) [RFC3291] Daniele, M., Haberman, B., Routhier, S., and J. >>> Schoenwaelder, "TextualConventions for Internet Network >>> Addresses", RFC 3291, May 2002. >>> s/TextualConventions/Textual Conventions >>> DONE (N/A). >>> >>> *) 10.2 Informative References >>> *) RFC3031 should probably be Normative, it is currently >>> listed as Informative >>> DONE. >>> -- end-- >>> >>> >>> >>> > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 15:09:57 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 115CD28D94E; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:09:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.588 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.588 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.011, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yT+6Y9kTb+yA; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:09:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36C6928D00C; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:45:08 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id CC39328CF8E; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:45:01 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080225224501.CC39328CF8E@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:45:01 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-03.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org 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 : LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP Author(s) : B. Decraene Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-03.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2008-2-25 To facilitate the establishment of Label Switched Paths (LSP) that would span multiple IGP areas in a given Autonomous System (AS), this document proposes a new optional label mapping procedure for the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP). This procedure allows the use of a label if the Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) Element matches an entry in the routing table (RIB). Matching is defined by an IP longest match search and does not mandate an exact match. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-03.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-interarea-03.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 _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 16:48:48 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED02E28CAE0; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:48:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.587 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.587 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.012, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JCztiko9kM4H; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:48:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 053DC3A6E16; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:15:06 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 136E13A6D93; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:15:01 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080225231502.136E13A6D93@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:15:02 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-igp-sync-01.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org 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 : LDP IGP Synchronization Author(s) : M. Jork Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-igp-sync-01.txt Pages : 8 Date : 2008-2-25 In certain networks there is a dependency on edge-to-edge LSPs setup by LDP, e.g. networks that are used for MPLS VPN applications. For such applications it is not possible to rely on IP forwarding if the MPLS LSP is not operating appropriately. Blackholing of labeled traffic can occur in situations where the IGP is operational on a link but LDP is not operational on that link. While the link could still be used for IP forwarding, it is not useful for traffic with packets carrying a label stack of more than one label or when the IP address carried in the packet is out of the RFC1918 space. This document describes a mechanism to avoid traffic loss due to this condition without introducing any protocol changes. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-igp-sync-01.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-igp-sync-01.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 _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 18:48:05 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8B743A6B29; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:48:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.363, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rTCMGGSSSoer; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:48:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2463A6825; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:48:04 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D5003A6825 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:48:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J6sA4LxHC3n7 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:48:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.169]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76E113A67CC for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:48:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id u2so2316170uge.46 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:47:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; bh=0EN7yJKq140+PeKakWn0xsZLYGpbupiqo2OSnF5LXDw=; b=EE0gbR95wgE2L70vkujDYTBr7MXVkH4ELjH5qhViMLxbgaAdQEZjlxlcv7tcCWWVPugO3Deo+CudVTmd8QLo2zgGkDylOK4pyW+7XEyeR1ZUzl8ctLZsOGZ2HnaZXplkSaPSMeVZh4IgntlgugpsbFz636lZkdeI8fV7A809xUY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=lm2ZKMmQYW0Ao9k7qInHvhKaq7KzYEbkCAGRM8GytkWUiNrYSGnuDzD4zWILiYpC4P2glaGaNSmjhQYvMB774TglZKW0nosalNkHWde53Aq3YjnFwxWT/3Uuk9QOaHlL+4KWDenZYr0mzai4dKlZ2WV5O2RJQ/7+vngw9H2tbnI= Received: by 10.142.147.15 with SMTP id u15mr3101062wfd.149.1203994074473; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:47:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.164.14 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:47:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802251847y59470ed8k429039ca086f6bb2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:47:54 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: mpls@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [mpls] LDP IPv6 - Clarifications X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Folks, We have posted a document clarifying and correcting LDP IPv6 behavior as described in RFC5036. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-manral-mpls-ldp-ipv6-01.txt Please have a look and let us know what you think. Thanks, Vishwas and Rajiv _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 20:04:31 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77EAA3A6D72; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:04:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.564 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.564 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.858, BAYES_20=-0.74, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fqy0v4aoU-f9; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:04:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 830FE3A6C12; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:04:24 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D96843A6BD2 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:04:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id svIdmwxyNxKG for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:04:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from web56506.mail.re3.yahoo.com (web56506.mail.re3.yahoo.com [66.196.97.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 48C4C3A6D09 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:04:16 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 8877 invoked by uid 60001); 26 Feb 2008 04:04:10 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=c9rH9MJkEE1iTMBhyFXtyq/EPmw6w0GFutpwpyCe0HdVw+NinW188XJw/NZssrjBg8oaV88Er40BPQVcStEKMeWZ/FSsL1U52yiVYi37CK5vaX35GXWsUypk394mFch18IxHPHpmIyZrf2mwdpqz7v4hrXru8k2zjXEZbGKiSww=; X-YMail-OSG: cO4fWUQVM1kQrHKYKXzliw_a33z4.Bxmn6OT2XKStg4G_VYu2_6vsblJDrQJdlOY8CoPWcHQziWcPuBonMNhoEA3ZLHJq57ybEZBEhje.MDAbPYGDd9biOxcjMWOyQ-- Received: from [210.210.108.194] by web56506.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:04:10 PST Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:04:10 -0800 (PST) From: Sengottuvelan Srirangan To: Vishwas Manral In-Reply-To: <77ead0ec0802251847y59470ed8k429039ca086f6bb2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <194419.7174.qm@web56506.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] LDP IPv6 - Clarifications X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1204956985==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============1204956985== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1083351200-1203998650=:7174" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --0-1083351200-1203998650=:7174 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Viswas/Rajiv, Thanks for posting the clarifications. Regards Sengottuvelan Vishwas Manral wrote: Hi Folks, We have posted a document clarifying and correcting LDP IPv6 behavior as described in RFC5036. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-manral-mpls-ldp-ipv6-01.txt Please have a look and let us know what you think. Thanks, Vishwas and Rajiv _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --------------------------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. --0-1083351200-1203998650=:7174 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi Viswas/Rajiv,
 
Thanks for posting the clarifications.
 
Regards
Sengottuvelan


Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Folks,

We have posted a document clarifying and correcting LDP IPv6 behavior
as described in RFC5036.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-manral-mpls-ldp-ipv6-01.txt
Please have a look and let us know what you think.

Thanks,
Vishwas and Rajiv
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. --0-1083351200-1203998650=:7174-- --===============1204956985== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1204956985==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 20:38:05 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5269428C2C3; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:38:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.655 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.655 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.218, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Clf-xj4QAWpv; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:38:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F70C3A67FC; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:38:04 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AFAD3A67FC for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:38:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ST7gLoVczncZ for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:38:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.174]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27B473A6783 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:38:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 25so1170349wfa.31 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:37:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=IviseM7D5QUHUDqu5jQN/eKbnuK8VqXlKGtyVjImma0=; b=noq8UXLIl+OOQxhj8SdSy1btuPhivS8aFG80AspVTsuEGoVgAKQSuhX6oFSg7nHJ6TjThLeFHJ0c/SDNsep4leBHFMAUcotz5PWcGVVTwGrxuROj/UMhI/WEtvhRFJZSr9tGeJvV2IIXfiQ2EPNXCyZ9CIqZhGLxRgGxaXnqfhU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ghzGKCU2n0OPKYbyAHue60mWSpyf6c5qrI1zkpUtSR43Mzg02aA9mlBIxZtud0+S4QzyIHJjpDxaduRRiTK6rejMPtF0HyjX9W4s96+em8f557YyySSyLLTqX5srtrh0uuhtoP0GKdQzRDUYUz1u/0Jc7V25sih/+DNkIJiiucw= Received: by 10.142.90.16 with SMTP id n16mr3191062wfb.70.1204000672309; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:37:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.164.14 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:37:52 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <77ead0ec0802252037l3128777en9bb24c0bda290d37@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:37:52 -0800 From: "Vishwas Manral" To: "Sengottuvelan Srirangan" In-Reply-To: <194419.7174.qm@web56506.mail.re3.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <77ead0ec0802251847y59470ed8k429039ca086f6bb2@mail.gmail.com> <194419.7174.qm@web56506.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] LDP IPv6 - Clarifications X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Sengottuvelan, Thanks a lot for the note. There are multiple things unclear in the RFC about how to deal with dual stack cases. It is probably because LDP has not been so widely implemented for IPv6. Besides there are remnants in the RFC which talk about /32 addresses, "All Routers on the Subnet" multicast address, even though they do not make sense in the IPv6 context. Thanks, Vishwas On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 8:04 PM, Sengottuvelan Srirangan wrote: > Hi Viswas/Rajiv, > > Thanks for posting the clarifications. > > Regards > Sengottuvelan > > > > > Vishwas Manral wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > We have posted a document clarifying and correcting LDP IPv6 behavior > as described in RFC5036. > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-manral-mpls-ldp-ipv6-01.txt > Please have a look and let us know what you think. > > Thanks, > Vishwas and Rajiv > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > ________________________________ > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Feb 25 20:41:01 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7904E28C299; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:41:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.87 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.87 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.477, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=0.044, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2FuRdj-GW0X6; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:41:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB8528C2F5; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:41:00 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6C323A6BFC for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:40:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KRLpDO61UYhL for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:40:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A9193A6783 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:40:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 25 Feb 2008 23:40:50 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1Q4enmv026279; Mon, 25 Feb 2008 23:40:49 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m1Q4eiJR027695; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 04:40:44 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 25 Feb 2008 23:40:44 -0500 Received: from 10.21.146.175 ([10.21.146.175]) by xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 04:40:44 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.4.0.080122 Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:27:30 -0800 From: JP Vasseur To: Adrian Farrel , PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri Message-ID: Thread-Topic: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) Thread-Index: Ach4Dl8SnZkOsOQBEdyjXAANk8WjQA== In-Reply-To: <003701c87713$3ebc7040$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Feb 2008 04:40:44.0538 (UTC) FILETIME=[BFB945A0:01C87831] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=5855; t=1204000849; x=1204864849; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jvasseur@cisco.com; z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20MPLS=20WG=20Last=20Call=20on=20two=20re lated=20WG=20documents=20(PathErr=20and=0A=20SoftPreemption) |Sender:=20 |To:=20Adrian=20Farrel=20,=0A=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20PAPADIMITRIOU=20Dimitri=20; bh=35JcZv4Af7fw/7RfWYkBRjvpoukWqX22GSyrTzwtf8I=; b=mxPEhLphP2bCANnZSHzEMvXN0Deb7A7v2sN/vWzhAYJG0RH7qMPIuqc95u TJjIry5mH+qCBAnkoAqUQepkRUyaPduz+wp24na9OAyPAKE/wmjCCzrWvHhA O2ZJ30A1PP; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thanks Adrian for forwarding on the MPLS ML. See in line. > From: Adrian Farrel > Reply-To: Adrian Farrel > Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:29:47 -0000 > To: > Cc: PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri , > > Subject: Re: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and > SoftPreemption) > > Hi MPLS WG, > > I passed on information about your WG last call on these drafts to CCAMP who > probably have an interest in this topic as well. We have received the > comments below. Please consider them as part of the last call. > > Thanks, > Adrian > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri" > To: "Adrian Farrel" ; > Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 2:16 PM > Subject: RE: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and > SoftPreemption) > > > adrian. a base question: > > 2205 defines a mechanism for hard-preemption by tearing down state and a > soft-preemption by error msg exchange only (no state modification) --> > note that section 2.4 states: > > "A teardown request may be initiated either by an application in an end > system (sender or receiver), or by a router as the result of state > timeout or service preemption." > > 3209 defines a preemption mechanism with the following conditions: > - If the requested bandwidth is not available a PathErr message is > returned with an Error Code of 01, Admission Control Failure, and an > Error Value of 0x0002. > - If the requested bandwidth is available, but is in use by lower > priority sessions, then lower priority sessions (beginning with the > lowest priority) MAY be preempted to free the necessary bandwidth. [...] > A ResvErr and/or PathErr with the code "Policy Control failure" SHOULD > be sent toward the downstream receivers and upstream senders. > > but looking at 2205 these are following the soft-preemption rules. > > -> section 2 in the error doc. is confusing "This text is a > clarification and re-statement of the procedures set out in [RFC3209] > and does not define any new behavior." > > now, with these docs an error msg exchange (fatal) for hard-preemption > (that remove states at detecting node and leaves subsequent decision at > sender) and an error msg exchange (non-fatal) for soft-preemption (that > does not remove state at detecting node and leaves subsequent decision > at sender) > > -> section 2.3 of the error doc. "Any node clearing either or both the > Path or the Resv state of a TE LSP MUST also free up the data plane > resources allocated to the corresponding TE LSP." is basically > confirming the initial 2205 mechanism behind hard-preemption (why > keeping upstream state without resource at the detecting node ?). Indeed, in case of a fatal error, both the control and data place resources are freed-up. The reasons for this ID is just to document these behaviors for hard preemption that have been implemented by a number of vendors and in production for several years. Note that because these implementations are operating in a similar fashion, the RFCs must have been interpreted the same way. As far as preemption is concerned, the sole purpose of this ID was to document the corresponding error codes in use. We're in sync. Thanks. JP. > > thanks, > -d. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org >> [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel >> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 12:55 PM >> To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org >> Subject: Fw: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents >> (PathErr and SoftPreemption) >> >> Heads up in CCAMP. >> >> These I-Ds describe interpretations of RSVP-TE and have >> implications for >> GMPLS. >> >> Please review and comment to the MPLS mailing list. >> >> Thanks, >> Adrian >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Loa Andersson" >> To: >> Cc: "Ross Callon" ; "David Ward" >> >> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 4:26 PM >> Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and >> SoftPreemption) >> >> >>> Working Group, >>> >>> this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group >>> documents: >>> >>> "Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation >>> Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" >>> >>> >>> >>> and >>> >>> "MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" >>> >>> >>> >>> The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been >>> "on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the >>> term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that >> that document >>> was required to progress the soft preemption document. This document >>> is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. >>> Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. >>> >>> Please send your comments to the working group mailing list prior to >>> EOB March 3. >>> >>> Loa and George >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Loa Andersson >>> >>> Principal Networking Architect >>> Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 >>> Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 >>> Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se >>> loa@pi.se >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls mailing list >>> mpls@ietf.org >>> http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>> >> >> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Feb 26 01:14:11 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5429A3A6BD2; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:14:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.397 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.310, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Syv6qMiC0qTa; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:14:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED3ED3A6B1F; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:14:09 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E6783A6B1F for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:14:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4VJaWKDN7xSK for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:14:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [62.23.212.27]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2E3C3A68D9 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:14:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from FRVELSBHS02.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs02.ad2.ad.alcatel.com [155.132.6.74]) by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m1Q90brO022169; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:00:37 +0100 Received: from FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.51]) by FRVELSBHS02.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:13:57 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:13:37 +0100 Message-ID: <00275A5B436CA441900CB10936742A382F4C11@FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) Thread-Index: Ach4Dl8SnZkOsOQBEdyjXAANk8WjQAARx1hw References: <003701c87713$3ebc7040$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> From: "PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri" To: "JP Vasseur" , "Adrian Farrel" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Feb 2008 09:13:57.0014 (UTC) FILETIME=[EA669B60:01C87857] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.13 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org the resulting question is thus what about those that interpreted the standard/RFC 3209 per 2205 ? are these going to be deprecated ? or is the soft-preemption only applicable when the hard preemption error code and best practices are supported (which is what i read from the sequence of documents under last call) ? thanks, -d. > -----Original Message----- > From: JP Vasseur [mailto:jvasseur@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 1:28 AM > To: Adrian Farrel; PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri > Cc: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents > (PathErr and SoftPreemption) > > Thanks Adrian for forwarding on the MPLS ML. > > See in line. > > > > From: Adrian Farrel > > Reply-To: Adrian Farrel > > Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:29:47 -0000 > > To: > > Cc: PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri , > > > > Subject: Re: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents > (PathErr and > > SoftPreemption) > > > > Hi MPLS WG, > > > > I passed on information about your WG last call on these > drafts to CCAMP who > > probably have an interest in this topic as well. We have > received the > > comments below. Please consider them as part of the last call. > > > > Thanks, > > Adrian > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri" > > > To: "Adrian Farrel" ; > > Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 2:16 PM > > Subject: RE: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents > (PathErr and > > SoftPreemption) > > > > > > adrian. a base question: > > > > 2205 defines a mechanism for hard-preemption by tearing > down state and a > > soft-preemption by error msg exchange only (no state > modification) --> > > note that section 2.4 states: > > > > "A teardown request may be initiated either by an > application in an end > > system (sender or receiver), or by a router as the result of state > > timeout or service preemption." > > > > 3209 defines a preemption mechanism with the following conditions: > > - If the requested bandwidth is not available a PathErr message is > > returned with an Error Code of 01, Admission Control Failure, and an > > Error Value of 0x0002. > > - If the requested bandwidth is available, but is in use by lower > > priority sessions, then lower priority sessions (beginning with the > > lowest priority) MAY be preempted to free the necessary > bandwidth. [...] > > A ResvErr and/or PathErr with the code "Policy Control > failure" SHOULD > > be sent toward the downstream receivers and upstream senders. > > > > but looking at 2205 these are following the soft-preemption rules. > > > > -> section 2 in the error doc. is confusing "This text is a > > clarification and re-statement of the procedures set out in > [RFC3209] > > and does not define any new behavior." > > > > now, with these docs an error msg exchange (fatal) for > hard-preemption > > (that remove states at detecting node and leaves subsequent > decision at > > sender) and an error msg exchange (non-fatal) for > soft-preemption (that > > does not remove state at detecting node and leaves > subsequent decision > > at sender) > > > > -> section 2.3 of the error doc. "Any node clearing either > or both the > > Path or the Resv state of a TE LSP MUST also free up the data plane > > resources allocated to the corresponding TE LSP." is basically > > confirming the initial 2205 mechanism behind hard-preemption (why > > keeping upstream state without resource at the detecting node ?). > > Indeed, in case of a fatal error, both the control and data > place resources > are freed-up. The reasons for this ID is just to document > these behaviors > for hard preemption that have been implemented by a number of > vendors and in > production for several years. Note that because these > implementations are > operating in a similar fashion, the RFCs must have been > interpreted the same > way. As far as preemption is concerned, the sole purpose of > this ID was to > document the corresponding error codes in use. We're in sync. > > Thanks. > > JP. > > > > > thanks, > > -d. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org > >> [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > >> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 12:55 PM > >> To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org > >> Subject: Fw: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents > >> (PathErr and SoftPreemption) > >> > >> Heads up in CCAMP. > >> > >> These I-Ds describe interpretations of RSVP-TE and have > >> implications for > >> GMPLS. > >> > >> Please review and comment to the MPLS mailing list. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Adrian > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Loa Andersson" > >> To: > >> Cc: "Ross Callon" ; "David Ward" > >> > >> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 4:26 PM > >> Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents > (PathErr and > >> SoftPreemption) > >> > >> > >>> Working Group, > >>> > >>> this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group > >>> documents: > >>> > >>> "Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation > >>> Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> and > >>> > >>> "MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. > It has been > >>> "on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the > >>> term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that > >> that document > >>> was required to progress the soft preemption document. > This document > >>> is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable > WG document. > >>> Therefore it is now possible to start this working group > last call. > >>> > >>> Please send your comments to the working group mailing > list prior to > >>> EOB March 3. > >>> > >>> Loa and George > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Loa Andersson > >>> > >>> Principal Networking Architect > >>> Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > >>> Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > >>> Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > >>> loa@pi.se > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> mpls mailing list > >>> mpls@ietf.org > >>> http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Feb 26 02:05:20 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78D1B28C439; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:05:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.418 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.418 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.331, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ATBx5nqu5jhr; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:05:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 191D428C30E; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:04:59 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C57103A6CB6 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:04:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B7hWHbzblbry for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:04:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com (p-mail1.rd.francetelecom.com [195.101.245.15]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1082C28C4AD for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:03:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from ftrdmel3.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.155]) by ftrdsmtp2.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:03:35 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:03:34 +0100 Message-ID: <5A0FF108221C7C4E85738678804B567C05DDFCF6@ftrdmel3> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: wg last call ended:Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension forInter-Area LSP" thread-index: Ach18o+TdEc8sLUaTT+hf7kzo6kJgQCaXXBw References: <47A9E967.8060403@pi.se> <47BFD336.2050500@pi.se> From: To: , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Feb 2008 10:03:35.0601 (UTC) FILETIME=[D9C6EA10:01C8785E] Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, dward@cisco.com Subject: Re: [mpls] wg last call ended:Re: wg last call for "LDP extension forInter-Area LSP" X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Loa, George, all, The draft has been updated to address the comments received, as per the dis= cussions on the mailing list: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-03.txt Bruno > -----Message d'origine----- > De=A0: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.se] > Envoy=E9=A0: samedi 23 f=E9vrier 2008 09:03 > =C0=A0: mpls@ietf.org; George Swallow; Ross Callon; David Ward; DECRAENE = Bruno RD- > CORE-ISS; LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-SIRP-LAN; Ina Minei > Objet=A0: wg last call ended:Re: [mpls] wg last call for "LDP extension f= orInter- > Area LSP" > = > All, > = > this working group last call has ended. There have been comments, > could the authors review and respond to the comments, when the new > ID is submitted please also make sure it passes the ID-nits tool > cleanly. > = > /Loa > = > Loa Andersson wrote: > > Working Group, > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on > > > > "LDP extension for Inter-Area LSP" > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-interarea-02.txt > > > > The working group last call will end on eob February 21st. Please send > > your comments to the working group mailing list. > > > > Loa and George > > > = > = > -- > Loa Andersson > = > Principal Networking Architect > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > loa@pi.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Feb 26 09:02:57 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2F228C5BC; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.978 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.540, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uXc1ZHNy+ohU; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E607D28C4BE; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:55 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC1A028C49B; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0YtYuUSd0g1E; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52AE53A6B86; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:53 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,408,1199692800"; d="scan'208";a="7178430" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 26 Feb 2008 09:02:47 -0800 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m1QH2lwt020167; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:47 -0800 Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m1QH2PpS006490; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:02:46 GMT Received: from xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.174]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:44 -0800 Received: from cisco.com ([171.71.95.70]) by xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:43 -0800 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:02:39 -0800 From: Scott Brim To: General Area Review Team , Loa Andersson , "Luyuan Fang (lufang)" , mpls@ietf.org Message-ID: <20080226170239.GA881@cisco.com> Mail-Followup-To: Scott Brim , General Area Review Team , Loa Andersson , "Luyuan Fang (lufang)" , mpls@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Feb 2008 17:02:43.0864 (UTC) FILETIME=[674F5180:01C87899] Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=swb@employees.org; dkim=neutral Subject: [mpls] gen-art early review of draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework-01.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework-01.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. Detailed comments: I started my review a few days ago before -02 came out. I've continued with the review of -01 in hopes that -02 hasn't changed too much. I'm not a security expert and I've forgotten most of what I knew about [G]MPLS, so in this review I am looking first for internal consistency and organization, and second for the areas where I do know a few things. In general I'm impressed with the wealth of the information and the thoroughness. I am mostly concerned about organization and possible duplication. Some of these comments are small, some are significant. I've left them in the order of the document itself. Originally I had a bunch of editorial suggestions but I've pulled them out except where they clarified meaning. > Depending on different MPLS or GMPLS techniques used, the degree > of risk and the mitigation methodologies vary. This document > discusses the security aspects and requirements for certain basic > MPLS and GMPLS techniques and inter-connection models. This > document does not attempt to cover all current and future MPLS > and GMPLS technologies, as it is not within the scope of this > document to analyze the security properties of specific > technologies. ... is general, not just about inter-AS or -domain. Make it a new paragraph. > Layer 2: The protocol layer under layer 3 (which therefore offers > the services used by layer 3). Forwarding, when done by the > swapping of short fixed length labels, occurs at layer 2 regardless > of whether the label being examined is an ATM VPI/VCI, a frame > relay DLCI, or a MPLS label. > > Layer 3: The protocol layer at which IP and its associated routing > protocols operate. > > Link Layer: Synonymous with layer 2. I won't argue much here because I know you have to be consistent with other, older documents but these definitions of "layers" don't work, and even ITU has mostly abandoned them. If I run IP over IP, is one of them Layer 2? "Link layer"? What about IP over Ethernet over IP? The best thing to do would be to get rid of all references to "layers", and just talk about "the IP level", "MPLS" and so on. That way you could delete these definitions and also avoid ambiguity. I would say this about every new draft. > P: Provider Router. A Provider Router is a router in the Service > Provider's core network that does not have interfaces directly > towards the customer. A P router is used to interconnect the PE > routers. "Core" seems to be used in multiple ways, not all clear. Here you depend on having a meaning for "service provider's core network", but you don't define it until you get to the security framework text below. Also, below you define a "MPLS/GMPLS core network" as possibly spanning multiple service providers, and "an MPLS/GMPLS core in a single domain". I think I know where you come out, because as you go on it seems to get better, but I suggest you make it clearer up here? > A MPLS/GMPLS core network is defined here as the central network > infrastructure (P and PE routers). A MPLS/GMPLS core network > consists of one or more SP networks. See comment about uses of "core". > This document defines each MPLS/GMPLS core in a single domain to "core" here too > 4.1. Attacks on the Control Plane All of the user plane attacks can also be done on the packets of the control and management planes: insertion of garbage, spoofing, replay, delection, pattern analysis, etc. > 5.1.1. Management System Authentication > > Management system authentication includes the authentication of a > PE to a centrally-managed network management or directory server > when directory-based "auto-discovery" is used. It also includes > authentication of a CE to the configuration server, when a > configuration server system is used. Even in the management plane, authentication should be in both directions. The PE or CE deserves to have confidence that it is talking to the right server. > It should be stressed that IPsec encryption > without an integrity check is a state of sin. :-) Leave this in. > MPLS and GMPLS, which provide differentiated services based on > traffic type, may encounter some conflicts with IPsec encryption of > traffic. Because encryption hides the content of the packets, it > may not be possible to differentiate the encrypted traffic in the > same manner as unencrypted traffic. Although DiffServ markings are > copied to the IPsec header and can provide some differentiation, > not all traffic types can be accommodated by this mechanism. This feels like a change of subject. The primary topic was protecting traffic while it is being carried by MPLS/GMPLS (or its ctl/mgmt traffic). This section, though, is about traffic which is already encrypted when it hits an ingress LSR. It's a very different issue, but it seems to be mixed in. Maybe you could have a different subsection, or at least a sentence explaining that you are changing issues. > 5.5. Use of Aggregated Infrastructure You talk about resource protection, but what about other attacks / mistakes that shared infrastructure makes possible, other than just using all the bandwidth. > 7. Service Provider General Security Requirements I have issues with the organization of the document. You start with "threats", then talk about "defensive techniques", and *then* have sections on requirements. Perhaps you could combine requirements and threats? In any case I don't see why requirements come after threats. Not only that but this section is not just requirements, it's also techniques. For example, > The network infrastructure must support mechanisms for > authentication of the control plane. If MPLS/GMPLS core is used, > LDP sessions may be authenticated by use TCP MD5, in addition, > IGP and BGP authentication should also be considered. ... This is mostly solution, not requirements. Or consider, just as an example, this section, which is still under "requirements". Where are the requirements here: > 7.1.3. Control plane protection with LDP > > The approaches to protect MPLS routers against LDP-based attacks > are similar to those for RSVP, including isolation, protocol > deactivation on specific interfaces, filtering of LDP neighbors > at the protocol level, filtering of LDP neighbors at the data > plane level (access list that filter the TCP & UDP LDP ports), > authentication with message digest, rate limiting of LDP messages > per protocol per sender and limiting all resources allocated to > LDP-related tasks. I'm not against any of the information, it's all good, but I would organize it differently so that requirements are labeled as such, and so on. Maybe all you have to do is change the section titles. This gets much better down in Section 8. Thanks ... Scott _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Feb 26 12:33:42 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EC928C7C3; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:33:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.347 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.784, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fx1N5MMK30Hg; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:33:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 731923A6D14; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:32:20 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCE5A3A6CF4 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:32:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9-sUX2vS03no for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:32:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from esc91.midphase.com (unknown [216.104.33.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 381D028C300 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:32:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from esc91.midphase.com ([216.104.33.66] helo=LC2.labn.net) by esc91.midphase.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JU6T9-0003jr-05; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:32:07 -0500 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:13:28 -0500 To: Loa Andersson From: Lou Berger In-Reply-To: <47B9B1AB.1020802@pi.se> References: <47B9B1AB.1020802@pi.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - esc91.midphase.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net Message-Id: <20080226203215.381D028C300@core3.amsl.com> Cc: Ross Callon , mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and Soft Preemption) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Here are some comments on draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02.txt: - Section 2: "... the head-end to its tail-end" Should use 3209 (ingress/egress) terminology, or 2205's (source/destination). We already have enough terms, not need to invent another pair... - Section 2: "The format of the PathErr message as defined in [RFC2205] is as follows: ... " I think the current text as misleading as it fails to mention that the PathErr format (notably Working Group, > >this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group >documents: > >"Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation >Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" > > > >and > >"MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" > > > >The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been >"on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the >term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that that document >was required to progress the soft preemption document. This document >is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. >Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. > >Please send your comments to the working group mailing list prior to >EOB March 3. > >Loa and George > > > > > > >-- >Loa Andersson > >Principal Networking Architect >Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 >Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 >Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > loa@pi.se >_______________________________________________ >mpls mailing list >mpls@ietf.org >http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 27 12:00:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2FFE28C8E3; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:00:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.547 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.547 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.052, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TW7yT14HdhT7; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:00:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4851028C343; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:00:03 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id A0DC33A6B00; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:00:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080227200001.A0DC33A6B00@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:00:01 -0800 (PST) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-bypass-02.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --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 : P2MP MPLS-TE Fast Reroute with P2MP Bypass Tunnels Author(s) : J. Le Roux Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-bypass-02.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2008-2-27 This document defines procedures for fast reroute protection of Point-To-MultiPoint (P2MP) Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths (TE-LSP) in MultiProtocol Label Switching (MPLS) networks, based upon Point-To-MultiPoint Bypass Tunnels. The motivation for using P2MP Bypass Tunnels is to avoid potentially expensive data duplication along the backup path that could occur if Point-To-Point Bypass Tunnels were used, i.e., to optimize the bandwidth usage, during fast reroute protection of a link or a node. During link or node failure the traffic carried onto a protected P2MP TE-LSP is tunnelled within one or several P2MP Bypass Tunnels towards a set of Merge Points. To avoid data duplication, backup labels (i.e., inner labels) are assigned by the Point of Local Repair (PLR) according to the RSVP-TE upstream label assignment procedure. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-bypass-02.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-p2mp-te-bypass-02.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-p2mp-te-bypass-02.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: <2008-2-27114503.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-bypass-02.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-bypass-02.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-2-27114503.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Feb 27 12:50:49 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CBA828C494; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:50:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.709 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.709 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.401, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=1, HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gskvPALMysmR; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:50:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53F993A697C; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:50:43 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B9C53A698E for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:50:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dgnNPruo548D for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:50:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.cpanel.btnaccess.com (ns1.cpanel.btnaccess.com [205.177.121.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF773A697C for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:50:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [65.213.193.41] by ns1.cpanel.btnaccess.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JUTEV-0004HK-Pv for mpls@ietf.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:50:32 -0500 Message-ID: <47C5CD20.1010401@isocore.com> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:50:40 -0500 From: Matt Tylenda User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns1.cpanel.btnaccess.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - isocore.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Subject: [mpls] MPLS 2008 - Call For Presentations X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0920653953==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============0920653953== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080603060906040403030807" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080603060906040403030807 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MPLS 2008 Call for Presentations - MPLS 2008 MPLS 2008 International Conference, the 11th Annual International Conference on MPLS and Related Technologies, will be held October 19 - 22, 2008, in Washington, DC. The Program Committee is soliciting presentation proposals for the conference. The committee seeks original and unpublished work to continue the tradition initiated by this conference in 1998 of covering cutting-edge topics. Presentations addressing new technologies and operational experience are solicited from network equipment vendors, service providers, the research community, government agencies, and enterprise users. For detailed CFP visit: http://www.isocore.com/mpls2008/call_for_papers/cfp.htm Please submit your proposals on line by accessing: http://www.isocore.com/mpls2008/call_for_papers/submissions.htm *The deadline for submission of presentation proposals is April 18, 2008. * Thank you! MPLS 2008 Program Committee --------------080603060906040403030807 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="------------020809070402020003070800" --------------020809070402020003070800 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MPLS 2008

Call for Presentations - MPLS 2008

MPLS 2008 International Conference, the 11th Annual International Conference on MPLS and Related Technologies, will be held October 19 - 22, 2008, in Washington, DC. The Program Committee is soliciting presentation proposals for the conference. The committee seeks original and unpublished work to continue the tradition initiated by this conference in 1998 of covering cutting-edge topics.

Presentations addressing new technologies and operational experience are solicited from network equipment vendors, service providers, the research community, government agencies, and enterprise users.
For detailed CFP visit:

http://www.isocore.com/mpls2008/call_for_papers/cfp.htm

Please submit your proposals on line by accessing:

http://www.isocore.com/mpls2008/call_for_papers/submissions.htm

The deadline for submission of presentation proposals is April 18, 2008.

Thank you!
MPLS 2008 Program Committee
--------------020809070402020003070800 Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="mailer_header2008.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: Content-Disposition: inline; filename="mailer_header2008.jpg" /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEASABIAAD/2wBDAAYEBAQFBAYFBQYJBgUGCQsIBgYICwwKCgsKCgwQ DAwMDAwMEAwODxAPDgwTExQUExMcGxsbHCAgICAgICAgICD/2wBDAQcHBw0MDRgQEBgaFREV GiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICD/wAAR CABxAsADAREAAhEBAxEB/8QAHQAAAQQDAQEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMEBQYCBwgBCf/EAF0QAAED AwICBAgGCg8FBwMFAAECAwQABREGEhMhByIxQQgUFjJRVWGTFSNxgdHSJDNCUlR1kZKxsxgl NjdDU1ZydIKDlKHB4RcmYqKyJzREY7TT4jVFc2TCw/Dx/8QAGQEBAQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAECAwQF/8QALxEBAQACAgECBQMEAgIDAAAAAAECEQMSEyFRBDEyQWEFUpEUIkJxM0MVgSRi gv/aAAwDAQACEQMRAD8A3lou0WiRpuG7IhMPOq4m5xbSFKOHVAZJGeygnRYLB6ti+4b+igUG ntP+rInuG/ooM06d096rie4b+rQZeTmnvVcT3Df1aA8nNPeq4nuG/q0B5Oae9VxPcN/VoDyc 096rie4b+rQHk5p71XE9w39WgPJzT3quJ7hv6tAeTmnvVcT3Df1aA8nNPeq4nuG/q0B5Oae9 VxPcN/VoDyc096rie4b+rQHk5p71XE9w39WgPJzT3quJ7hv6tAeTmnvVcT3Df1aA8nNPeq4n uG/q0B5Oae9VxPcN/VoDyc096rie4b+rQHk5p71XE9w39WgPJzT3quJ7hv6tAeTmnvVcT3Df 1aA8nNPeq4nuG/q0B5Oae9VxPcN/VoDyc096rie4b+rQHk5p71XE9w39WgPJzT3quJ7hv6tA eTmnvVcT3Df1aA8nNPeq4nuG/q0B5Oae9VxPcN/VoDyc096rie4b+rQHk5p71XE9w39WgPJz T3quJ7hv6tAeTmnvVcT3Df1aA8nNPeq4nuG/q0B5Oae9VxPcN/VoDyc096rie4b+rQHk5p71 XE9w39WgPJzT3quJ7hv6tAeTmnvVcT3Df1aA8nNPeq4nuG/q0B5Oae9VxPcN/VoDyc096rie 4b+rQHk5p71XE9w39WgwVp3T/qyJ7hv6KsCStPWD1bF9w39FVCSrBYvV0X3Lf0VUJKsVj9XR vct/RWtISVZLJ6vje5b+iroJKs1l/AI3ukfRWtRNkzaLL+AR/dI+ir1ibJqtNm/AY/ukfRV6 xNkzabP+BMe6R9FXrDZNVqtH4Gx7tH0VZjE3SSrXa+6Iz7tP0VrrE3SZtdt/BGfdp+ir0nsn aklWy3/grX5iforUwx9k7Uiu2wR/4Zr8xP0Vrpj7RO1Jm3wvwdr8xP0Vrx4+0Z7UfB0P8Hb/ ADE/RV6Y+0TtXnwdD/B2/wAxNXx4+0O192Jt8P8AiG/zU1fHj7RO19zmLYW5Bw3Eb/nlKQKx l459o1JnfumY2h7er7elv5EIT+kivNlzY/aR2x4r70/RobTuOcYH8n0Vx8v4n8OnT8vHNCae I6rOz24Sf0inm/E/hLx/lDT9GssAlhLDwH3JQEq+iu+HNh95HPLDL7VXpDcJhex6O2hY7igV 6sccL9o89uRLiWo/wTY/qir0w9oz3yeb7b/FN/mpp48PaL3yZbrd/FNfmJp48faHfL3H2B/E t/mir4sfaHe+7w+Ij+Bb/MFPFj7Q8l92O6D/ABLf5op4sfaHkvuxK4X8S3+aKeLH2h5L7jdC /iW/zRTxY+0XyUcWB/Et/mCs+PH2i969C7ef4Fv80U8ePtF71n+1/wDEo/NFXxY+0TvWCl28 fwLf5op4sfaHesgbd/Et/minix9od69+wf4hv80U8WPtDvR9gfxLf5op4cfaHej9r/4lv80V PFj7Re9H2B/Et/minix9od69CIR/gG/zRTxY+0XvSFxajCG4UNJSrlggAd4rlz8UmFb48rtf tDH/AHXhf2v61dfNepYQaBQGgUBoFEmgFeyghrLqVF1udwgiI/G8Q4ZS6+NnFS7u6yUecBlB 87toDVWo02C1uTzEenFAJ4McDzU81KUtWEoSB6TQSodUuOHm07ipG9COzORkDNBXbNqm9z71 Jtr1iMUQlITMfMppwJ4qN6SEpGVcqB9cNVWm33pq1zXkRlvRlSkPuLCEEIWEFPPv62aBawX+ He2JL8PmzGkuRd+QpKi1jKkkdxzQSZoK+/rCC1qVqylpwpOGnbgMcBuUsb2oyj271oBI7uwd poHOpdQJscNqSqK9M40hqOGY+C58acZAJGcDnjtNBhbtVWu4z48WCrjtyoiprUlPmbUOJaKD nmFAq5g9lAjI1lAi6kVZJbbjA2s8OerHALsjfsZJ7UKPDOM8ieXbQP7TeG7lb1zENKbSh19n hr7cxnVNKPzlHKgZq1XFFht154DnBuS4yGmuW5PjSglO75N3Oge328M2i2uzXUKdUnCGI6Pt jzqztbaRn7pajj/SgLDeWLxbGpzKS3vyl5hfntOoO1xpf/EhQINB7aLu1chM4bakeJynYa93 eprGVD2HNBIUENfr69bXYUWLDVPnz1rRHjpWloYbSVrUpauQwBQZ2W6XKY5Jan2t22uxynaV LQ626FjOW1o7cdh5cqCId1jdlMzZkGxLl26Et5syfGWmlL8WUUOlLaufJSFAZPOgkrnqViHp dWoG2HJLPBQ+1HThLi+LjakbsAHrd9AjE1ha5T9sZjBxari4+yQrqrYdjo3uNvIPNKh6PnoE dS6zFmukW2oiofeksOSN70lqKgJbITjc52k7qCRkXxMbTb17eayhiMqUtlpaXOSElRSlwdU9 nbQMdM6revS8GKyy3wg6FNzGpKut3KS3zHbQNL1r1Vvu8y2tQmnTBabdddfmsRc8RJUAlLvM 4A7aCROq4o0cdUJYc8WEPx4R1YS5t2btvPkKBPTOqHr24sKissIS2l0KalsyVdbHJSW+aeRo PfLG3p1I9YpLbkdSC03HmKxwHXnUFYZCvuV7RyCvO7qBxb9SRJmnDflIWzFS268tCuawlgqC uz+ZyoGNv1LfpKoLj2nXmYM4pxIQ+06ptK07kLcbGCE+nB5UCuqdV/AT8BgR0vuzy6EF19uM hPBSFHK3OXPdyoJOzXBy4W9qYttDRd57G3Uvp7e5xHVNA/oCgKAoCgKBNVWBFVaiElVWSKiK oRVithBWKrBJYFbQgtNVCKgqrEIrKhWkYFRrSbJKcq6GBcq6TZNblWQJlVVHoNB7nl7KinFv jcde4jqVy5OTTeGKzQ2dqQOwV48rt6Em2OXbWFKjFQITHdiCaCl3e8PqkCNHSXHlnDbae0n2 UFNnXGdPnKtPijj05JI8WSPjUlPM1rHOxLNoAWvVzpUuFbZEphK1N8RCc4Wg4Uk+0HlXrnO4 XjRj1xukdlx+TGdaZZe8WdWtJTtexnhq9Csd1b8qdD+3tanuMQTINskyIpztdbbJScduPT81 TzJ0RydRPrdDKApTxVsDQB3FWcbdvbnPdWvKnjObsrUtrQ25cYEmK28oIaU4hQClHsSPafRT ynjeT/Ke2RPHJ9ukxIvL45xtSUjPZnPm59tTzL43skarjQfhCTbZTcIDcZC21BIT98r0D2mr 5U8bNLeq/g/4S+DJXiGziGRw1bdmM7v5uOeaeU8ZnBvM6fITFgtOSZLnNDLIK1HHacD0VfKd DyfIvVoUj4VhvwuL9rLqSkKx24PYaeU6MBqhvHbV7nVlDuk24vqYgMrkupSXFIbG7CB2qPoA qdzqSRqdvOCrn31ZmXE4GpmcedV7s9R5StffU7nV55SNffVe51LMahaJ86r3TSahXFp3FblQ 8nKSqA4R28v+oVy+J+it8X1L3oc/7sQv7T9aqvlvYsANAoFUCgNAolVBnkY50FXa1Z0dsXOV PTqC3JlyUttSMzGexjdtG3dyPWNBKlywams0lmPLan22SFMPORXUuJ9o3IJAIoJRpCW20IT5 qAEp+QUDSLaYkafMnNJIkTy2qSc5BLSdicDu5UAq1RFXVN0KSZaGDGCs8uGpQWRj5U0HtttU S3eMCKnaJL65LuTn4xzzsegcqB2aCsu9HelHGX23Ie56S6qQ5LK1eMF4q3hzidoUkgbT3YFB jddS6Afdaj3C+wEvQJCHghUtlC0vMnluG4dh7RQZafh6NlXuZf7DJZlSXU8CWqI+l1nKlBxS tiCUpWogbj30D+42mxJRcplxSjxaYy2i4KfV8VwmNxSTnknG886CFsWpOjazWtu2QtRwDFb3 kF2ey4s8VZWrcsryclRpsRjDvRi0zEjeVrDkKC4h2NCcuTBaBaOWx2hRCfRmmxJXi/dF14ci quV9tkhENanGGVTWeHxFDbvUkLwVJGdp7s02PLPfei2zOy122+22OiYsOvMJnM8PiAbStKSv qlQA3Y7aBKLeujuJPelxtXRmhIfVKeii4R+CpxfndU8+eOzNNi122+WW5p3W2fHmgcyY7qHf +gmgSu9ii3NcZ1bjrEmGsrjyI69i0707VDsUCFDtyKDCDaolnEuW5Led4uHJMmY7uCUtDl96 lKUj0D5aCtw2NDXR2TbrTqXifCBedctsKc0sHinc8UpTvWAokk4oLTKsVtlWf4HcbxA2IbDS SRhLZBSAe3ltFA2c0nZ16iY1BwlIuTCVI3IWUtr3p2bnEeapQTyBPPFA9XaYa7o3dFJJltMq joVnlsWoKPL05TQZXG3sXC3ybfIBMeU0pl3adp2rG04PdyNA2tVjFtI2zZUhCUBtDT60rSkJ 7MYSk55UHqtP2pcqdKcYC3rihLclSueUoSUjGezkaBtcYGnYemVWe4PoiWgx/FNzzwb+L27c b1Ec8UFYhdIvRbZXS2vWrEjCA2G3pTbqUhPZjhpHP56bDeT0h9CEk3DxjUNvdTc+H42lbvIl lO1BT96U9oI55psZW/pH6FoNhTYm9Tw129LSmCl18rUpDmd+5faSdx50GFo1V0UOvQ2o+tUS EQFBUaK9OQlvKE7U5yEFQSDyBNBcptqtd+VCuDM1e6Jv8Wlw3U9joAWM4WkghIoJGDFMWOhj jOP7P4V4grPykBP6KBzQFAUBQFAUCaqsCSq1EIKqskFitQJKrTJFVbQiqqhNSVVWdkFkitRN kiqtGyLhzWkIqBqoQXkVpklvPoq6NseP7KujbwyUgEq5JHaT2VKIeTdnJLmxlfCYHLdkdb/S vPnm7Y4pO2yogI4s75lOf615sq6yLLDudpSB9lN/lrk2lmLtbFebISfk51A8Fyg/xo/IfooG lynRVNHC+70H6KCkw1BesrbhfLiLyfZwl0DGPJYQ9E1a06PhO8mHauGO1L6XwmU5/XaQPy0D G/fAYssf4XemoCbxdVNCAUAn7Iz8ZuPL2YoI2/Qr3rLSt1lWeCpx6VfUyUxUqQFpaTFDeVFR SDkit41mnVhsl8XC03FuVpeeNtRwDdLdcBHXB2ukqEhskoLjec5HaKooNpgzldJDEa2XDDhu akxbqpIX92cPFJ6qjj8tbvyYXV6HK06uEw/AuPwU7eocm5Xi6vMKHxTp2cNppSuGFFWSaxG0 ebRqO0I1lOv+5FtuDW2C468h1L7ipiHE8NAUrPUBOccqoey7VqGPq/U2oZalJ0zKg3ARpan0 KZcD7O2OlKd+T1iMDHKiJREImQbn4m/wl2LxdWpfG0eJZMPafsLPbnqY9POgoHRe3IVcbzFY XsnzLPLYt3WCCXlbcJSskYUrHKt5MxOWHSeoozMSFql1DrSjMftumpLgUpcltjLaytCt2xSu WN451NqXFntzVsVPuVlisXpFjmSpNrw4hkPNSW0x3VNbypJUgnq7udN1NMm3GYNouVwg26I3 IuekUzpEbYsteM+MBBSlG/ISocynPaKlUtddNaeat7ojWkLgJixHolzSNgLzpb3/AGQXTxNx UpJb2cqstQm0xpeXrm52JyyMNfBrk5UAtFeJHDRhplaCsb1b+sMKGeym6voxnW61RIFzuC7K 01Pi2lEjxWSkoRxzLDaVlhLqlN5bPMFXPFO1TT1+yw+DKnWizR514dh2iQ1a1Ba2W0y0KMpx DXEB5KAHM9Wr2p1SFlsFmS0hSbK1JfcuUhi6MMEykR2kbdrQfLjXDSASQsg07U1EDbMCW6hG eElxQRk56oJA59/Kvfg82SxSD9gL/q/pFZ+J/wCOrxfUv2iT/uzD/tP1qq+U9qfBoFAaBRKq BRKqDJZ+KX/NP6KD5xx7RNvGqFWmAgOTp011mM2TjctTisDPtrLTYvQJ0qP9H2rnLZdypqw3 Bzxe5NL7Y0hB2pex3bT1V+z5KqO3UOIWgLSoKQoApUOYIPYRVRlQFAUBQaq8IHpYRobSxjW9 0eUl2Spm3pB5tJ7FyCP+H7n20HFnwJdnrI9qFTalW4ShFcmLPnyXElwgZ5qOASqstOnvA0H+ 7Wo/6a1+qrUZrbvSwP8Asz1P+LZH6s0HEPRb0cTekHUJsUOa1AdRHVJ4zyC4nCMDGEkHPOst NtfsMdU/ylgf3d361XTI/YY6p/lLA/u7v1qaB+wx1T/KWB/d3frU0MV+Blq0JJRqOApQ7BwH k/47jTQ1hq/RGveivUUcSXVQpf2633OC4rhubTz2q6p5fdJUKK7F6FNfSNc9H8C8ywBckFUW 4beQL7JwpYHcFjCqqLFrj9xV/wDxbL/UKoOOvBSx/tftn9BlfqhUV3BVQUBQFAUFU6Ttbs6J 0RctRLb4zsZATEYPILfcO1tJ9m48/ZQcY2i0dJ3TLql7Mhdwl/bpD8hZREjIPIAJGQhPclKR k1FbRg+BhdlJBuGp2ULPnIjxlKA+daxn8lNGzv8AYWp/lWr+6J+vTSD9hcP5VK/ug+vTQYz/ AAMb4lKjA1NHdV9yiRHWjI+VKlfoppdtbyFdKHQpq1EcyFxJAw8Gm1lyFMaBx5vIEE8jkBQo O1dDaqi6s0la9RRU8Nq4sJdLWc7F9i0/MoGqieoCgKAoCgKBNVWBJVaiEF1WSShWgiqqhFQr bOiChWgkqrGaRUK0hFQqyoSWDWkIK3VpCKuVa0yTUr2VpNknX2221OOdVCRlSqX0IgbvPiTo wYRvQQoK3dmR7cHnXnz5ZXfHCw1jxIgI6q1n2I+mvNXVYbZAhZCvE3Vn2oTWWlniNqbSCmAs D+zH+dY0qVZelcvsRSflcT/lmsh0H5eceL/84oPHvGnBjgf8/wDpQVq72N5/OY+f69BV5OkT u3GP/iKBkvTjSO1js+T/APvOgYz9P27gL4iC0D1eJjsJ7zig13fmJVrnqZShK2l5Uy4sFIO3 0Z7fmrp5DxxGDUERL7nESAhwE8PB+LIHYD308y3hRzT6XHFuMOnxloH4vb5wV2Yz7akzhcdM 13GD8JpfdUUFCOxvt3Y8057qXki+NIpntKmR1spUY62+JIa5DA7jn5a339Wehe3T48p9hIwA 4ShaVduR6K1hntzyw0sJtkY/6V305bYGzxvRV6m3gtMb72mk2yFlZXV0bZKsLH3uavU2RVam O8U0m2PwUx6Kml2wVamPZTSFY9qZ3VdCz2qEhAGK6xipiWjbBX836RWPiPorXF9S86LP+7cP +0/Wqr5b2J4KoFQaDNJoFEqoMlH4tf8AMV+ig4G6OP34rD+PUf8AqDWVba8Krol8TlK15Z2P sWSoJvrKByQ72IkY9C+xft599UWbwW+lv4XtqdEXh/dc7cjNpdWeb0ZPa3k9qmh/y/JQdC1U FAUETqrU1q0zp+bfbo5w4UFsuOHvJ+5Qn0qUeQoOGJkjVnTD0m9Ubp91d2R2u1uJEb7v5rae Z9J+WorcvhH6QtGkOhzTen7UjbFh3BIKz5zjhYcK3Vn75auZoH/gZ/ua1H/TWv1NWJW3Olj9 7PU/4tkfqzQcveCL++i5+LXv+pFZi12dWkFAUBQc+eGQ00dH2J0pHETcFJSr0BTJKh8+0VKs L+B1xPIC7bsbPhRe30/aW85pErcOuP3FX/8AF0v9QqqRx14KX779s/oUv9UKkWu4KqCgKAoC g0h4XJeHRczsGWzcmOMfQNq8f82KCI8DZEcaTv6k/wDeVT0B307QyNn6VVIOhRVHtAUBQah6 e+he7dI6rM5bJseE9beMHVSEqO5Lu3GCn0FNBaeh/RN00ToSFpy5SmpcmIt0h5gKCNriysAb ufLNBdaAoCgKAoCgTVVgRVWohJVVkiuqEFZrSElZrSEV1pCKq0yRVViEjnPZz9AqhyxZZz5z t4SD90vl/hWLyyL0PRplrHWkKJ78JGK5/wBQ34zaXYLbFZL8ubwGB2uObUir/U08MQj8/RTW f2yW8fvWkKVn5wnFX+pyTxRW5924iVCKx8Qvlud5nHycq157TxmcaO+8oJSFDP321I/xUK5d 43Im4lpwlK1vst+kKdR9JrN5F0sMZUFoAKmxs45DjorncmtF/KSzMoUtUhghHn/GprPYKMaw sy1AMy46yfQ6Oz002JJm8wnT1JDKvaF5psOBdoh/hmjj0E02MH7nbkpyt5n8tNiv3jUFsY6o dZORkELpsUpu/S7uub4ilgNQQFSpDryW2kbjtRuWr741RUtZ6juNpXCZnNtBqejjRZTbyXGH EpVhW1xHI4x2VFUqbfJt4U4IkYnTnjDPFLqStDLyshIDv3BWUnq99JWlfdgLauKG3JTWd5St zl1StXVxnt51futy9DjV2mZFmu8mNOkKLsR1LMlaVBXakKynGPNPI+iul6sY5VEJnRFMtu8I gIW4pG8ZDiEnzOVS/wCllO5UxmclUwkDcFIQAsJUlKPNBxy5CrqVJbD5vSWrI+l/K9CQmztl OHHVbXVBxewONtnrbArkFVjTW9rHpnT2u3obEhpURSrm0X7fCfmNNynkAkcRphZCjuwcVrHk srGWEpbT86632R4lb2kuy2m1uy1LWlptlpvz1uLXgAJ7816fI8/VIPWrVSLrAtzMVqYbmFqg Soshp1hwM/bfjAdqeHjrZ7KeQ8Z5LjzLXFjy33Y8iHJWWmpMR9uQ3xEjcUFSCcHHOt48krNx Nxd/GHG2mOu66oNttjtUtR2gD5Sa3cmdHd80/qG2xH5b3AdTFWlqY1HfbedZW4rakOISSRlX L5a5+WN9WE3TGpYcWQ+54utyG2XZkNqQ05JZQnzitpJ3dXPPFTyw6vfJbUpjBz7H8ZLPjAt/ jLXjfC28Tdwc583njtp5YdTi1aV1FKZjvJ8XQ7Ka8YjQ1vtpkuNEEhSWs7uYBIp5YdD+yPFw AjnXpxrlU5OaX8HOK7ht/wCoVn4j6KvF9S5aNP8Au5E/tP1qq+W9qdBoFAqgUBoM0qoMyr4t f81X6KDgjo5/fgsX48R/6g1lp3xcYEG5QpNunspkwpaFMyGFjIWhQwoH5jWmXC/SPoq+9FHS E38HvraQ0747p+4d5bCuST6SjzVj6aiuxeizpHt+vdJRrzG2tyh8VcogPNmQnzh/NPak+iqi 40AaDjHwlOlxWrdQeTdndKtP2h0ham+fjUsdUqGPOSjzU/Oait1+Dh0ReRum/hm6s7dS3lCV PBXbHj9qGB6D3r9vyVUQ3hifuCtH4zT+ocpSGXgZ/ua1H/TWv1NIVtzpY/ez1P8Ai2R+rNBy V4M+p9P6b6QV3G/T2rdCMB1sPvnakrKk4Tn08qy06n/27dD/APKyB7z/AErTI/27dD/8rIHv P9KA/wBu3Q//ACsge8/0oMXOnnofQgq8qoJx3JWVH5gBmg5x8I7posuuXLfadP712m3LW87M cSUcZ1Q2jYk9bakZ5kc6it0eCtp6VaeitmVKQW13iS5NbSe3hKwhtX9ZKM1UbI1x+4q//i6X +oVQjjrwUv337Z/Qpf6oVItdwVUFAUBQFBUOlbQqNb6FuWngsNSXkh2E6rsTIaO9sn2ZGDQc a2DUnSZ0N6jkAxl259fxcuFLbKoz4SeqoK5A9vVUk1lWymPDN1HsHG09CWvvLbriR+Q7v01d hT9mdff5Nxffr+imwfszr7/JuL79f0U2heN4Z88f950w0vn/AAUlSer86FU2ul10l4WPR9eJ SIl2YfsLrpwh5/DsfJ++cRgp+dOKqN1sututodaWlxpwBTa0nKSk9hBHaDQKUBQFAUBQFAmq rAiqtRCKjVZIqNaCK60hFVVkgsn5K0hFR9taZJKWcGroM16gu8J3htREr9DrTIOfnK682Urt jSLusdUd0V3n2DhN/Saz0a2av6z1glKlCM8kJ7TsZx/ik06U2pOsdX6quHDafURFB+1lTY63 pOwDsq9Km1UfN2V2vkf1lq/zrXWps28VuR6vjPP2Jz+mr0Oxdm13B04L6t3cNg/1qeI7J2Jo y8uEEOKSk8yssj9G01LhF2m42g72rclM5xK043NoYHmkZCh1OYrFkaO29CL4cjjXqe0tjm8k pQhJCeau0eip6BK2dHsuRDZcauFwajPJC3FrUEclHI2p593pp6Cyw9CRmUtoVcLwpsp3bm5B Ax6eWOXtpuCRGg7Zwtzc67rSOa/sxZP6abENeNJRVJcYgy7mXkpCyHJas7DyyMZKhTYpF807 sZffJuPBjcNHjCn1HG/sIIyNtBFQLXBOndRaflXQW6VcREktyZ7pSyeAo708UBW3kr0c6gVF wtNssECyW+8QJFztdluCYV64iDCZnyJCVpCX3U8MLDYV18YFFhm1q9DkO+2Y60tkSe/8Gvu3 JpLLTCghtYllvKSl9zG3cUed3VAhdNWad8Slupvdrf0k5YWGrdZRwPHk3UBsFwtbQ8HOIFKK 1KxioujjVeu9OSZ2onLxfbXeNPPT7cqxQYimXX0luS0qQ4UoSHNnCC+IVHCu7NUSp6QNG/D7 Rn3SyuW1N0W7a1pksSeFG4D2OohtCWGjlA2Oc84xV2mmitRanuWpXIbswM+MxmSwJDbSWlPo CipKndgSncM7QcdlOqypqyaocd0DrNm6XDizX2LZHtTEhzrFuO+pRaZB+5Qk9gqLV/0dqjTp Z0pertctKvPWiO02/MnF9m8xWmFqUGG44Utt1SRyQrHfTaWK/o6f0f3a+vomqXZ23Yct952Z cvFY010upLcdRSgKbQoqKlAE9ldd3Tmkn5Fjlap0rZZt6slr0kw3cNjen7m5tQpxsrcEiW51 0eNLw3n0dlBhqNgOpselNPSNOxbe9cAURLZPdlueNPIDaX5S3AVBISMZFax9EqoQrg6NSR4E qT4qlqaiPKloOOClL21bgV7MEg91b7Vnq2Vqi82SyR5ybBOsKre5LjuTnWLk7Ou8tliQlzBC xtySNygK5tM5EjT8HUeqdXo1DbZkS7xLiiBAjPFU0ruA+LSpraNm3PWyaIVRM08deM6+8oLa LclhLpt3GV4/xE2/xXhcDbkq4nt7K0JnTWpNNnyeuKp1kDMC3Ijy5MxxwXxpaUrS4hoDuTuw 1y7KzoV/TMxzltUcd2fRXtwefKLq/KdXbHEKPI7f+oVef6KnF9S6aPP+7sT+0/WKr5j2pwGg UBoFEqoFAaDIn4tf81X6KDgzo6/ffsX48T/6g1lp36T1j8taZUnpf6NYXSBpB62Kw3c42XrT KP8ABvgeaT9455qvy0HJvRP0hXjot144m4tuNwVueJX+3ntGxWN4H37RyR6RWWndUOZHmRWZ cV1L8WQhLjDyOaVIUMpUD7RWmWl/CX6Xhpaw+TNoexqC8NniKSetGiK5KX7FL5pT85pRqvwY OiTyjvI1ddms2O0u4hNrHKRLTzz7UNHB/nVFdhJqo0J4Yv7grR+M0/qHKUhl4Gf7mtR/01r9 TSFbc6V/3s9Tfi2R+rNBxV0O9HLfSFqk2FycbelMVUnjpbDv2sgY2kp++rLTdn7C+F/Kpz+6 J/8AdrSbH7C+F/Kpz+6J/wDdobH7C+F/Kpz+6J/92ht6nwMLfuG/VLpTnmBESP8A+Q00bWXT Hgl9HVrlNybo9Kvi2lbksSCltgkffIbA3D2E00bbtbZaabQ22gIbQAlCEjCQByAAHYBREPrj 9xV//F0v9QqhHHXgpfvv2z+hS/1QqRa7gqoKAoCgKBpcLpbbayHrhLZhsk7Q4+tLaSo88ZUQ M0DVK9M6kiKAMO8Q0Kwr7VJbCu3H3QzQQUzoa6Kpqt0jS1uUc7shhKef9XFNBr/sJ6H/AOSc D3f+tNA/2E9D/wDJO3+7/wBaaCT/AEAdDj2N2lYacfeBaP8ApUKaNtA+EV0Fae0XbIuotNcR mA8/4rMhOrLqUKWCpCm1KyoDqkEE1FbS8EvUM66dGrkGWtTvwLMXEjOKP8CUJdQn5Eb8Cqjd tAUBQFAUBQJrqwIKrUQisVWSKhVDhDiW0jagfLWa0BIUVAYHbQLPNNOpKVgEVJREi0BbjiUu YCDy+eu05HO4MXLArGeKMDmeR7qvmTxmZYLSVNRkqlyyhbiEt8k5SOSVqz1dx9lc889t446V /T2rkXaTKhybc4xNjKwtCFlxKUgdZTi1bAMEEcqw3pTfLm63ycu3O25MFKEF1IC3MrTuABIV 6QcitSJYjbvxVBK+G1kew91dXNCvybkq9MwWlIDUkEJwgdVQGc5POs7u2tG2nUXy7XO62hUx bT8FCnEywEgnmBtASAPy1MN2FOOh6ffNQaklWWRIWkttOSPGnOsrCcJ4YwAB6cisS31bsMdJ a01GnViIU24yJMOU94opLzqlhkBw5UgHluIGOtWIui3SjfL3Z+k122xbjIEZplhbS2nnEBWU 8TYpKTgAkEEJ9NZsVOdKd+ujfRRAvqVqZuF7kNhbSFlLbaEhe/BzyTt2pAOa1YkedA98u824 PWiTOWiAtHFZcyXFbsJQASv7nJ7B30xhWuGdW6hkaznFE59LUV9xQiFxwMpLTvVBTu83l5pq aabc6V7jelac0+mNKUhVw3OSnG1KQoOtJz1FJIISrfgpplGYadECb3IbuzLz52x2y+xIcW4p 0PhJ28yTlPLsPKrIbajmT9QC6Ll+MOb5cgKkNJccQ0VqOByzswnPZUirNbIVolXW6PTnV3e3 aasb1xcj8Vxhx2U2EpDD62yFcNB7BVsQM6VtuvdHW1/TcSPpudKurtrkpbdkORFNpiLl7vjC taSOGUkp7c0RC2volcuen7au3akgPIvxdbs25EtAdeYyl9kbmdycEeecA0XaCf6HZzVt4ovE T4WctBvzdqAf4hiIQpbg4nDLPEAQcDdzrLW0TrbTarbrCPbnWGYrbjFvccRA4m0Nvx23VrSH ipZWUqKld27sqG2z9XaH0Y5ZL+dM6bttytkKEuTbbxbbqXLmgNIB8YlRXV5KR92kI5VQw1p0 UR16iv0fSUqMXIC7fusyfGA821MDTLZDjiOErLzuThRwDWpUQieh6bLlph26+QZymrqiy3Th iSjxWa6F4zxW08RBLahuRUUvb+hsz478uBfoEy3xW+JNksIlOOtOcQtcMx0tcbJUkkdXBTzq xLU3I6MbbatIz2L5NiQbmzeosaLdlpkONmPLhcVDfDbQXEFSzlW5I2881vuxpFWvoWvM+9T4 RmxmJUC4KtHA4cl5CpGBhze00sNtKOBucxg1rsaOLF0XXKZ4g98LxIN3vMqZGtcVwP7uPb3O C4N7aFJRzT1VE4q9mdK9fNKuWa0xLuxc2LpAuLshhDjHFSUyYxAeSvjIQTzVyUnkasqLb/s2 ZuGlNEXSCu3xHprb3wuZ0xuMuQUy9idiXVZVhGR1aztrRfUvR7b4Wq7mlufFslmdvHwNZWHx IdK5IabWUfFId2IHFHXWe+p2TqbXzRFttdgtrrt1CdRTrjLtXwYpDikLlRXks8JtaW8JO5XN S1bcdlO51Sts6NJlv1DbhOfYmQUXePa7rHCJDKtzqiPiy8hsOoykgrbJq916oOz6wZt1zlsy QeC1IeQgJHPalZAH+FdsOZzy4l6tGuLbdQYTLakuOfa8kdiefMd3ZW+XllwZx47Mm2tIn/d+ J/afrFV4XoTgVQKA0CgNAok0GRPxa/5qv0UHB/R0f+16xfjxP681lp32T1jWmWQNBzn4U3RN 4zHOvbKz9kMAIvzKBzU0OSJAHpR2L9nyVKqtdBnhCx9J6WuNi1EpTzEBhb+nz2lSvwT5Co5S e4ZqDXun7Pqjpf6TFJecKptzcMi5Su1MaMk8/mQMJQPTVHdenLBatP2SHZbWyGYEBsMsNj0D vPpJPMn01USVBoPwxf3BWj8Zp/UOUpDLwM/3Naj/AKa1+ppCtudLH72ep/xbI/Vmg5d8EX99 Fz8Wvf8AUisxa7PrSCgKAoCgKCE1x+4q/wD4ul/qFUI468FL99+2f0KX+qFSLXcFVBQFAUBQ aU8La3GV0VB7ZuTDuEd5fLkArc3k+zLlBWPA1vttTZ77YC4hueJKZrbHYpba0BCiPTtKOdB0 lQFAUBQc+eF/qe2M6QgabDqVXOXMRK4AOVIZZSoblAcwFKXgZqVYX8DmI830f3aSoENybost KIwCENNoOPnFIVvyqgoCgKAoCgTURQJ5Sfue6rKE0gYrTLFYFNqTNAmaqI66uvoQnhKkJOef izQeP9YHsrKol+4y4/nTX2if46Cont9CMU0pBepJLbW5V2axkjrwpABwOzkc06/7EvpKemY7 xSUOZY3LW02tpHn+aUr624VLBra2ubLre9n8Pkn2glz6asRCrwNYuKycfBbPnDaexutbC76E ra63cgn/AArqwhmkBWp7cr2nP5hqY/Ut+RbSDa29Xajcaxu8XWRn+cmsz7qb9BKVN9Ir5WfF lcBxLaj2KVv832VjH5VqqgWpDerXGkpHH8fdG3sC1B1WUj5eys4tJLpNnR730kIudvR8RIix 9jHm7djRCm/YeWKglNcomzvB9sMyUEuMPXFpCF4KXA03xUNoHak5OSVd9arMSXg/xydXx1KS EMtxchJVjCu7l90Seyk+5k1dppsvdIl9jJTuIdnlxKvQH+8ennUjVb51xp6YrS+nJcFtTrUZ tYdYJxsChnIWr29xq1kj0UX60xbhKakFDapyeCkladwXg43Ncl4PZyFBX75octPtx3WObqkf GhJ6mTkYJ7xQRuu7zNsklrVVrtjM5q6Q02qY1IYJiSBJTl1hQ6q3AdvaPy1AxkdIfiEawsWO 3263GDMdcctsVpxqNx3o645UsLWVkgLIHOsXJqYqvZddXax6XskWJEjv+SUt6U0V5OFyHCna 9hWc7/NCccu2ptZiYzOkF3Ma4sttG4ItD2npEcocCExXG1I4qSV/bOv29nsrPd06I6fdbprT VltMKKo397xeLDSztQFLiR0NM7C6VBJIZ3Kya1K56WF3XOt71ZdWXm26QtMSS3HXD1PqKKwp ExLcjLbudzpRuc2HftRTdNI+5dIOv47kjVTsONDRrFloQn0JURttMhtXEaHEJG11lIO/INCv P9sF3jTUzIdstdsccuSb1PDSJGJctkL28UrdVtALijtb2jJqoibJftRaZs8u6vW6LN0/qp0x 1tvLcDbj8JYd6imHGnkKbLn33MVFOtQ6+1GqztplwIEaHepTN5hJjE9QwmvE2044i1AYTk8X rK7c1U0eo8ITUPjQmuWuA48m6LvUcbpSEMy3Mbxht5G9CinOHN1U0ZQul7Ucdyz3RqIyWtPT ZsxpfDd4Lj9zcU8428vfjq5OwAg47asqaQNy11Nnaet9j4TSWrdIky2nEghW+XtKgclQwnby wKvZOrC761uV0t+nokpljg6bS4mE4gKyvivB88TJI84YG3HKptrS0SOmu6TpT8m6Wa23Hdcf hmK0+h8JjTOGhsqb4bqVEENJ6qyocqjWlzlQenWFZphnaahyprT0u6InFTTs2KqYtD8hbbKX e8tgglslPd21WKLY50t3dMXU1n0VBbclTUXkSApYemONEry20/IUsNrUSohpKQaDVqJTzs99 x9Ox55xxTjeD1VqUSoYPoJqOi39HiwdTRcnrHicv7JVTs1lj6OotJn9oIv8AafrFVpwTINAq DQKA0CgNBkT1FAdpScD5qDkDRPRF0mwukq0XOVpyWzb2LsmQ7JUE7UtcYq3Hn2YNZV2Tu6x9 GeVaRmDQeuNsvsrZeQHGXUlDjahlKkqGCCO8EUHHPSb4OetLZq2UjSlofulhkfHw3GSk8IKP NleSk5Qew94qK6F6BuihjQOlk+NoSdRXIJdurvI7PvGEn71vPzmqjZ1AUGmvCh0lqbU+jrZD 0/bnblKanh11pnGUoDSxuOSO8igZ+C1o3VWlrDfGNRWx62OyJbbjCHsZUkN4yNpNIVszpHt8 246B1BAgMqkTZMF9qOwnzlrUggAZ5czQc9+DR0Za/wBNdIa7hfrHIt0IwHWuO9t27ypOE8ie fKoOqaoKAoCgKAoInV0aRK0peYsZsuyH4MlplpPapa2lJSkfKTQcR2Lol6ebHKanWiw3O3z2 0FCZMdSG3AlQwobgrvrKrD8DeFj99qH+8/8AzoPfgbwsfTqH+8//ADoD4G8LH06h/vP/AM6A +BvCx9Oof7z/APOg6U6FGNZM9HcBvWHjXw8HHvGfHVb3scU7MqyeW3FaRadRWC2agsc2y3Rr jQJ7SmX2+zqn0HuI7RQcl6q8GLpN0zdPHtIuqusZs7osiO74vMbHoUklOT/NOKml2ZIvfhU2 34lSdQZxyDjXG5D2kLqDPyw8Kj7y9/3QfUoDyw8Kj7y9/wB0H1KBNy8+FTc9zSU6g7MK4bRZ 5H2gJopfTXgzdKmp7oJmpibXHdVmVMmu8eUof8KAVHPo3Gqm3W2k9L2nS2n4VhtLXCgQkbGw ealHtUtR71KPMmqiYoCgKAoCgKBNdAl1Uk8/ZQYjbjlVGJqoRVVGBqoir0602y246MpbUVHD vBPZjPdv5nza55LFGTqNLUpXFXIZ2p2bmXcuHIGEoV6Tjt7K59lS07U8KDJCHpNzCjI4hSiQ 0tHD2jkSOxvJ5DtzWu4dacvQkMynWnpMjejY25KUlTuCc9qeWPRWpRp3U+pJNuuE7xIlJyRx U8+aSrck+g8zWazVUa1Yt24tTFKIcaSlLaewbU8ut/nXPdY22AzNTOtSJSBjclXV5csfJXsw y3FMoX7oYJ9p/wCg1Z8ypXREdK9V38kf+FXgf101Pspj0OvoY6SXm1ADisvp2kZyQrIFZ+1b VS3w/GukVTC1JbR8JvN8NXmhPGVyznODjGamBSnSI2GOkO4B1AZk7CuYn7lTnC5LQfQpG01m qlelgNQegfSyHEuPT5KW1LUVK2sNMtkqCUZ2pGVpTVqYth9DOlY9uh2G6p+NmTYx8aVjljYC nb6MZqbStC6RIjdMepSQVp4lxGEjJ3cfsFGq6Xv3FlaZtrKor/NnqspRu3EpAClbTgAZ7zVq KHpWDp91+Qm9w3G2Gi2p2U4wUht7ibGdryes2NyvPz21RCdJFvjWR+LGubz8y5K4SIlxkSXn kvrLqNwG5Sg24gBQUOxSeY76gOnJkWuLZpMe6tTolv4bMKC6dr0MkcVpR2HDwW0gs7lJynvN ZyrUihyTbrxCizpbMhpbsrgMoSlKEJbKVFCMjKlq5g7lcq53Vdcdw1k6FDuiXr6JDCExn0MM xSdr6krcLZKsDbkK9JpcfRZl6qtshtsNtot7j8hCsuu8y0rb2BKhy5Z62KzouRNm9TLNdbfc mkBp+2zWZzbSAQcIXvCUn0YBHz1camUb1uFx0xYdURNNxLjFcs+vZ12m3hxp1BbYYnx+DDQ8 Qdo4biioZ7K3tzkQ6YliXqqVZGnINwGjNOQrba2VCI+JEpakuSn4pluIibwV9bfu9gzUDhNp 0qzf9QItVutkpSvgl4cM2ta2g7G+yg1HmK8W4anBlzhLyk9lVDQz9NWxel7AyqzXOzv6wuMe WVsMOMJgvOsJWWkOlzxdsgkbgfueRxQRcprRVo0xKlwItoenxLFKVGS8iO/9kovim2lFC93E cTHxtyDlPsqhafbrC/Fus/TsKxOapkWaxykxXkwvFgp9K/hFbLT2I6HchO9PnDuFET+q46Wr fqjS9i+ArWWXbTOdjyWoYjoYctJU++gOpO/4zkkoBUM8u2qIG+WrSYs12UzGsqdHps0BWlpj Xifjy7qfF9+5Q+yyoqL3EDnKoplr5emZsTpGt0SHZ46LROt/k27EbjMu/GvbHtjqMKdCgcry SB7KGmoL5ZbnZLrLtNwSluZCWpqQ2hQWAsduFDkflFGnSM6xqg+EG90jSbpbG9JRcSHZQuEd bikItojlCWELU4VKcGMYoiuXPTU/VV60bqeyaig221QrLbYsi5qnNMyYL0NBS+RHUtLm4Hsx 21CNXrWly4Sl+MeNAvOFM1Q6z2Vn40559ft+epcnXqtvR8jbqeCe5XEx6ftKqRM76OodKn9o Yv8AX/WKrbgmQaBQGgUSqgUBoFAaBRKqDMGgUBoMJdwgQWePNktRWc44ry0tpz8qsVNtY4XL 0nqjRr/RAP8A9fgcv/PRU7x1/peT9tPLdq3S1xeDEC7w5L57Gm3kFZ+ROcmkzjOXBnj85Uyk itOTKgKAoCgaz7pbbdHMmfKaiR09rrywhP5VYqW6axxuV1PVAudKHR42soVqCFuHb8aD+is+ TF3/AKPl/bSsXpG0HKVsYv0FSidoHGQnmflIp5MfdMvhOWfPGrElSVDck5B7CK2872gKAoCg Sky4sVhb8l5DDDfNbrighAHtUcAUWY2/JXXek7o+aXsXqCEFdvJ1J/Rmuflx93onwfL+2vWe kzo/eVtb1BCKva8lP6cVfJiX4Pln+NWNp9l5tLrLiXGljKHEHckj0gjka281Z0BQFAUGLjjb aC44oIQkZUtRwAPSTQVyR0l6Ajq2u6ggg+x5Kuz5M1i8mL0z4Plv+NYN9KHR44sIRqCFuPZ8 aB/iaeXH3P6Ll/bVhhT4M6OmTCkNyY6/NdaUFpPzpyK1K8+WNnzL1UFAUBQFAUBQFA2eUaBs uSAv08x+igWHnKx2cv0VYV4aqEVVQ1nSExor0hXmtIUr8goNQ3zUNyuLg8bd+KSsqS0kDAz6 O+uVWoZ6RxOwjcByz28q5sohb6Sd3E6+euDy5/JTSH0fVkqzcmkcZL8JKVIQSkpKs9ZA7jXQ a+uF3fMouyTjccLcxhavapPbnuzWdJTHjKSVPcltc1bU4zz9n01msr7pZx74H4jq+RCg0O7G K9HD8lP4RJvkE57z+ius+a070YhQ6RdR8Mn/AOjhKT3Z8ZB/LWZ8mkX0VsSJHSK4ykJWHA4X UOLU3lG/75HWqRpWo8NbuvZLKS42lua/9oK18NKXjzynCuXby7KmJWPSzEXA1gviSxMZcYjS EO5JUlpY2ALKggqPzc6y1E50lX0XLojlTXUcNbE5qzW1kdYcOIeLJeV6OI4oDHsSKDcXRRDj +TmmndmFcHOR6die3FSM1z5o8JV006kacHIvXPq+j46qtdGypNxj6cta1ODiOocQWT94B1QD 7MZJpUa5+G5TDFzS3OKn5rTjb8ZrhfFNqOwoCX0LDvLPeBTaxqPWepr1LlpRIlKlsQC2mJJe QGZWEjqF9oHapQIwpY+XvrLoba1v4uKLc3JjcJ/nIlyCrdxRtCdoGAn5cVYGLVyfvDiGbVb1 +MOu5bKnessEBLaA39ylH3PsrnlGpTedEnNxXG7jMLEll1SDCCTjchW1zrjq5SfRWXT7nGnT KdiNQosRmXJMviNSHnuGOz7UAr4rby6xOKsyc8sVf1Vdpk65vyZvUf5tuNE80Ka5beXI47Km mzBlltwBCAMfdnHbUvos9SzsRrhbCgcu7HfWZWqREZgt52DqnqpIHZWmWTUdCkq3IA7lfNSw xpnOjDeA0lIBwrOOdbwrOeJ9p7VN20+JrMJEZ6LPSkS402MzKZd4R3tkoeSsZSrmCOddHCvL xebnqG7PXi8uiTcJBSVuYQkAISEoShKQlKUpSAAAOVSqbGO1kEoCVk86y6yF0Qht3hPXTgt4 wDn2VNtdWMlyQ+6qRJUt2Q6oreeXzUpXeSfTWdr1DbEbq4SkE9mAKu06nBhM7t4QlR9OK0ye xSEKTkdnaKKuOgJfE1bAGMbi7y+RhdIxn8nUWlz+0cb+v+sVW3FMBVAoDQKJNAolVAolVAoD QKJVQKA0GrbtpF7VfS88jUEV6Rpi2wkmE2rcmM48rGeYxk5PZXC47z/D6nHzeP4f+z6qt6ei vo4/k7C93XTx4+zy/wBdzfuqodK3Rpoq36JuN6tVvbtV0toQ/GlRiWzuCwNuAdvPNc+TDGTb 1/BfGcmXJMcruVsrR0+TP0pZ50lW+RJhMOPL9K1NjcfnNdcb6Pn8+MmeUnum0mtOTKgKAoNL ayt8TVnTpatN3fc9ZoNvVLMLJCHHTk9bHd2fkrz5Teen1uDK8fwtyx+q1sJvoz6P20BCdO2/ aOzLCD+kV18eLw34vl/dTG+9EfR9cbc+x8BRGHFNqDb7DYaWhWORBRjsNTLjmnTj+O5cb9VR Pg93KdN6OmkTHC6uFKfiNqUdx4bZG0ZPozU4b6On6njJy+n3jZddXzxQFAHsoNPdNMdV61jo nSchZFpuUl1ya0kkcQNYwDj2Zrhy/OR9T9P/ALOPPk+8XeP0YdHrCOG3p2Bt/wCJlKz85Vk1 08eLx/1nLf8AKsZvRX0dy2Sy7p2CEEHmhlKFDPoUnBpeOLPjOWf5VTugJ52IrVemy8p6LZbm puEF5O1olQxk+1PZXPhvzj1/qU30z/di27Xd8sUBQFBrDwjHpzfRnIEbcGnJMdExSM8mCvrZ x3ZxmuPP9L6P6XJ5vVJab6P+if4JjLg2u2ymi0g8dQbeUrKe1SlZOTVxwxY5fieft62n0ro/ 6MVNEP2W2Ja7zw20f4jFW4Yuc+J5vfJSugptmLqTWtvtCivTUeYj4PIUVNhXPcEE+yscXzvs 9X6j644W/Xr1bkru+WKAoCgKAoCgKBo/QR7mc0UqiYMUiE1XJvtyMCrsNmLq247tWoJHdmqI nWcp9qzOmM4APNfSDglKvy1LUagfeQXSXMqH3Py1laaqOHE7viiPOxzJ/LWKyZSWmSC4V8wM d2O301naIq+NhciG7uwkxGsp7OQz2Gt2ivzWWTkloOqPaUKwcek5/wAqnZEStUfhbmmFDecb F9me457we+s1lbtNXVMdh5l/c51POTzSO7CU91deHIi22hyKX4bvYttzr57AkhX+ddtt6T+j S0m93mQ4Utt8AgLXhIWSock57eys7XSG6Jod1a169OusZcNkqfabkKTsbKFuqDeFHv2dtRo4 0vpebD15cnnIrxbEuTwpJQS0pK1ZSSv2iriVXenbTNyj3xUoYegfBaUW6RnKlGMFPcNXtRsI +TFZ2sN4NpumtujCVZLW0y5d1vMyGUBfJSnZjkiQnGOotKEIJHoApsbO0R0kaW09BhWfUT4s 8mynxV5T4wlRVhtJyMgdbt9FYmaNE6U1NYIXS9fb47KSuLc3ZbMAJSefjL+5KlejlV7lroe4 6wtTWh13q0ONXUtgtsO89gWg7XE47erz5ClyXGNLG33HU5XcZ5ixml8RTJCXG3XD2bQQcDae Zz2UjaIvEazKiLLbrk2SWFl8vEJUhzbyVuPVUnl2JNIt2pFt8Vjz2+Ijx+Mw3u4Ocp3OJ3cN RP3qx1vZWqkbNt+hrbG0hCnu21S7sXuJOQ4fF0RYz+QxwiCN6lqGW/YKlqMpWjXm9CXWEyGE veNiSpc88N9aQNw2rXhAWRnDY5nvrLfZqifbnksuSGUqTBGwOPIyG1LPLHoJHfXPTXZBTDsQ fukOc8kd9axKkrWtsIUPusHcT3/JXLkdOIioglWVYVuO0K9lXGJaRJG1WRkHGfl9lbjO2fF7 efbyNaZ2TWE/FkntHYO/n3VG5Q9HbUtDg5AgD5D8lWZM5YlmIrYZ+6USgHHynuplWOjxhKS7 8ajLnbj0Vz2744spYWwsKQnCCOQ9FZW+jxEsdZpwdVfYrsxypcU77IpcIKVqKRt5Nj76usct njLqSB3nuSP86oV3qydgOT2D9FStLT0ZFfllA3f+d+oXVjGXydW6YP7SRv6/6xVbcUuDQKBV AoDQKJVQKJVQKJVQKA0CgVQa81NrLW0/WbmjdGpisSIkdMmfcZmVBIV9yhA+UVxyzvbrH0eH 4finH5OT7/aAaQ6apAHjGto0fl2R4g/zFOnJ7r5/hp/13+SbvQxervsa1VrKddYSSFLgoSGm 1lPp/wD8qeG351Z+o44/RhJW0YcdiJFaix0cNiOhLTKB2BCRgD5hXd823d2cpVRCiTyoMqAo NPvjheEvGU5hIes54WT52AR/lXD/ALH1Jf8A4f8A+m3813fLJS3kNRXXF8kIQpSj6ABk0q4z d01l4N53dHrq8Hau4ylJJ7wSmuPB8n0f1X/l/wDUbTrs+aKAoA0Go+k5xDXS70dOOHajiyE7 j2ZVtA/xrhyfVH0/g/8Ag5G2ga7vlgmitQ9Bo4mp+kCU2Qphd1KUKHf1lnl+WvPw/Ovq/qN/ s45+G4K9D5QoCgKDW3T3qC52fRCU253gPXGWzDW9sC9rbmd/nZAyBXHnvo+h+m8Uz5PX7TZv C8Hvo7RFaC25TrmxO93jqTuOO3CcAU8OK5fqnLv7FleD70cEYMeVg/8A6ldXwYs/+U5fx/Bh 0NuSbTqfVui0Pl+0WJ5s24rCeIlLoyUlSQN3z1OL0tjp8f8A3YYcn3ybars+YKAoCgKAoCgK BpINBHOBSjhIyaBu+xMIKW2iT8300EI6mQglKurU2I6YpW3vHtIIqiHv77rsRLHXXnny7OVR VPkQZZ58JWPkrWkRkmBct2UR3Veg7SadURUm13tXLxR/Ho2KqdFJ3yz3laYBbhPqKYbSVAIP nAqyKuWLKMTY72FoWIEhOO0BvmPy1zuAJmnbm7IcVEtspttX2ovM7nB3nrJz3+ipcaxSUSza gZuCVrtchXPKVFPUTywSefOt44VqLna4kpsBx2EsHvUQMCt6q7WeGWkEBbGVd3oqaXaXZlNZ AUjqA5TWfVdpmNdmAnmk+1Ke2p6ipdM03x3QsuOyqK00k8R12S4W1pW11kCPgYLi8bceg0o5 vgXjxW1kpfkRJRd/gBzUCMbeRHdzzis6De4TI7sVyGh95bLjgXxXieMQO0qRzHPPbmspt7A6 N9W3ZC37NbH5bIJStaVspx6OqtaVD5a64+qN86B01qGTpKHp/UTDdpYgrJYgoCkKUjkVOPON qXuU4adWpkt8vQFrlu8Q3DgbTuCIjQTk4xguKwcfNVkh2UzVvRzMmMIiJRJksp3cJ9htvlns DjW5O4g9hTWtQmTU+lNIzZ7ElWNpRMTFe3dVaVLUrrdYjkA0vIpppcTpvWVyhuzoUJxqztHb HQrskbTtLu0nlnuz2d1OjPZKRLT0nWtpoNWhD6M5KJCWXmz96oIcJQFD04zTxr2MrzorV11t s7xmwPh2SOphxojjE534BCU+jkK5+Nrs1lqPot1/ZrK9drnZVw7ZGCeM+p5teNygEnAJUck1 Zjpbmbw9G6vXHbl+JqWw7GL8d4FGNiCncrmcYAVz7+30UvHFnIcN9H2tJD/AYtRXKceVGS3l O4uN81jGexIPNXYKTBLmlmuhXpPU94ubJsdUkyGkqdbBLaeqpWcnsUavjJyPV9BvSql0Npsg UrGT8e1nB+ep46lzR+o+ijW1vTEblxEtSGkqDzSXkbm9ysgE5wcjnyrXjqd4rMq0zIYLMlpS Fo6xIIKcOck8x3lVTquzmy2653dy22yCzx51wcU2w0k7VKUhWAkE1MsdnfS/jwfulZLpULQ2 4rmFJTIRyX3fkwaThJzaQesejvWun7WzMusERoMlfCZeDyVlSv8AhSnn+WpeLTXm2pLqHkKy tOFpRkpxnn2UsSZHHi7GOHnsT2+3vz89YvzTsctoSnAHm7d3t5Kx/jmusxLTOLNdU2ladoIz xCfZ31LjsxyWzoumcfXduwMJHHGD/R3KdNFrrfTR/aWP/X/61VWEuDQZg0CiVUCgNAolVAol VAok0CgNBqy+6Inua4ud8tGoZVrnTEpQ+iNHSvqJQkYyc+jNeXL6/R9ji5p4cZljLB5L6+/l zdf7oj6Km8vy134v2Y/yy8ltf/y4u390b+inr+V78X7Mf5bQ04xMjWSGxNluT5bbeHZjqQhb hz2qSOyvVi+Rza7eiUSqq5lEqoFQaD2g130oaL0/epEC4PTpNrv0TKYM6D9u2nuI5ZHz1w5d f+30PgubLHc1LjfntWk6W6QAkbdc3nA5D7DbP+ODXLd/L1d+L9mP8kJ2i9UTI6o971tenLY5 ykNiMhrck9oKht5Gnr+Wpy4T1xwx3/ttbR1mstm07Dt1lGLcyj4ok5UonmpSj6Se2vVhJr0f J58sss7cvmmq04igKANBSulDSenNRWZlu7vOxH4zodt82N9ubd/4R357xXLl193s+C5c8Mv7 VKb0rrxDYSzrq9FoeZmIhRx7TzrhLfy99z4vvhj/ACxkaT1u80W5mub14srk6ExEIO3v5jb+ ml3+THPj+2GG/wDbYHRvpjTuntOph2Na3mVrLkmQ9zecePapdejj1r0fN+L5Ms895LYK6PMK AoCgrPSNp2wag0rJtt8WpqGopWh5vz0OpOUKT7a58uter0/CcmWOe8fVreHpDWceOhm364vQ hoADIMVCyE93M7u72155v8vpZcnHfqwx3/sovS2vygheuryEnt+w2x/jgU3fyk5OL9mP8rZ0 V6PsOn4092DNfuNymuBdxmy+TqiM4GO4V34ZHj+O5ssrNzU/C/V1eEUBQFAUBQFAUDOSPbQR zi1IJIoI+TKeSOqvtHPHKpVQ0l8k9ZXOophJecUyW93VPpqmkbJkOIaCWyN/f31dsod2RPUc knFYuazFIwpzXC+OdbbWO9eBmuuPImWGmfwhbyrCn46fap1tKR85NXuzop41ZglBcmRDkdUc ZsZGe0ZPZV7po4YkabUMqlwB/wDkksj/APdWey9WS7ro1pJV8I2o7e0CTHz/AIqqdzRn5W6F RIVxL5bENpx1VLbz2ZPMZ7KeRdHbetOjbvv1n+UvtJ/TU8h1A6Qui1tWFaktGT/5yOz5hTyQ 6lU9I3RhnlqS07f/AM6B/lU7xdFl9JHRexgu6ntQGM9V5K+X9UGnc00J0064jaglIjs3a1Tb c2HlQmoanwEpHJJeK0hJkL7sJxjvqbK1Km4LEUMJCOG2d4WBtkcxgoK/vfZUZJMTm0LSUKIT gcNTgGeXcNp5ZqDePQf0o9HOmYchN7SmFMeyo3lKXHlFJIxHLaQVJHfmrjlpdNonwjehgedf VH+bEk/5prW10xHhK9DQ5C7vq9viT9XYRX4SnRcpeYk+U4R2jxRzt/KDU21MWgrFc7Kze4c6 7uyFQ25vjklllSkb0JUtYPIjrb14+QmjfVvJvwitBNtoQFyUhCQA2mN1QAMBITnsHoqdk8Zt J8JHR6lNhlM3hK88qjZx8g303U6HCPCW0DjDirilXd9iciPTnfyq96nRUulTpm0fqrRcvT1q XLVJmPMFReYLTfDadDiskqVz5U7L0US6aytLdss8WzuvszYbXi9yhuI+xnippTS1hW49ZQWQ eXOm2tH+iukyBppcmY+07Ku8sqU+hKdqBkgpS2vPUTntAHP5qvqmtpp/wgpnwwm5RorqEIZU xwXHcg7yFE8uwHbgip6nWGMHwhNXMXNy4S40SSFBLaWUhxvanPMg5PWxyzU9WusVjUfTNqW7 XV2U81H8XV9qaIVlCB3cTPP8la7VjrFZnyfh59Mh5AacbRjkSU9ucjNO1WYk43jUOFb34bq2 ZMN51bTjSti07sHKVjmMEZrNLgk16u1s482+9fritxGOuJTwP+CqaTVeXDVF+vDja7vOkTls oLcYyFle1GeQppDRxsyFIQUnfg7ztPNOOY51GsTOZHW22t4xnG+QG8pO0HuSrl1TWfuzYa8C QpCAACSUrCyFAjb9x7Qa6dikBaxGSQ4VAHn5pOPkHfTYtvRTaXWdb2+QFHh/HfcKwcsOYO4/ LTtWOzq6wT4TVqYQ4+2hY3ZSpaQfPPcaqpMXW2/hbPvE/TQZi7Wz8LZ94n6aDNN3tf4Yx7xH 00CgvFr/AA1j3iPpoMxeLT+Gse9R9NAoL1aPw6P71H00GYvdn/Do/vUfTQZi+Wf8Pj+9R9NB FyLnDi3Ndwiyor6XU7XEcZsK+bn7K45SzLtHqwyxyw626KjW0NPnpb/qvJNXy32PBj+6HDOu LMtQStfDz37kkfpq+T8VnLh/+0qVGoLH6xi++b+mujzsxqGxesovvm/poMxqKw+sovvm/poF E6jsHrOJ79v6aBTyj0/6zie/b+tQV5y8WZesm31To5jNsYS7xUbArH32cZ51x1/e9Uynh/Kw +UWnfWkT37f1q7PKwfv2m3GltqucRSVpII47f01L6rKh9H3uzx7QWpFwjtqS6valx1CTt7uR I5Vz4vk9HxVlyTnlHp71pE9+39aurzDyj0960ie/b+tQHlHp71pE9+39agPKPT3rSJ79v61B Xr7d7LIvtpInR3I7alFxQdQUp9G45wK45zeT08OUmGXusHlFp71pE9+39auzzPDqHTvrOJ79 v6aCA0vebPHk3NDk+O0yp/czudQARz83J7K48cen4iyye6w+UenvWkT37f1q7PMPKPT3rSJ7 9v61AeUenvWkT37f1qA8o9PetInv2/rUEFrC82eRbEcC4R3VNupUptDzaiR8ma5cs9Hp+Fyk ySLOsNMcJP2e0nkOrnsrcrjcayOsNMesWvy1dp1qHsF5s/wzc5qp7DMd8pDSXHEIzjvwSK5c c9bXo58p0xn3WLyj0960ie/b+tXZ5R5R6e9aRPft/WoDyj0960ie/b+tQHlHp71pE9+39agP KPT3rSJ79v61AeUenvWkT37f1qA8o9PetInv2/rUB5R6e9aRPft/TQNnr/p9X/3KL75v6aCO evVkJOLhG98j6aBg9dLOf/GRz/aI+moGLs6ynPxzB/tE/TVQyel2vHVda/PT9NRdo95215JH COf+IfTV2GUk2soUGwEE/en/AFrOS456R7zduLWFI4p9o/1rMjWXLtHrj2/HWg7sdmBzxV25 3IlMYt6+DiDuw3syEHKRk9WtdiUw8TtaUBLtnL3pJbzTv+EtIvMWYIwnTyuRyAGTU8n4TaGk QLcrkdMrUnOUkNLyKnf8HY3RabQr7bpZ1YGM5YXk+ntxTyfhQLfpkEg6KfV7fF1YrXl/DJNy LYc4RoyUlPsjKP8AhUvJ+DbBLNnKA27o+Y43zwPF1J5+nsrPk/C7VC+6auD0t5UDT0xtpeC3 mOvqd21ISmrvbSvI0nqhtznYp688lExnyPmwmmhlG0hqjnsss5vdnzorxz6M5TUqLFZrBKYS oT9KzHj98GXclXpOU4xVmV9g9dsrakqCdHSdxOUr4DnL/lrXkvs1okmyHHW0dIUoIKR8S4Bn 0nqip5L7KwNimhJ4emZaFHzviV4+bq1O22pSCNO37eA5aJqgQc/EO4/6a2bLiwXUDC9OSFnu PCc+rWLkbYv2S+qSAjT8lJH3Qad7vZtp2XbBWnb8r/7C/wAuf2lwZ/5amzZI6d1Et1H7SSm8 rzkMO8gO7zasNl5Vgv5bWhFjf3fx/i7hXnOdyTt76G3irDfg4r9pJBz6Y7qv8dtXdHg07qHb vNnkAjzU+LO/RTtUZJ07qFXP4IkI++Hizn1aXKrs8ZtGoVlqN8C7A4tKOK5DdISCeZJxgVmW 2lpK4WDU8a/vwxaFvohuKbEiOw54q7tHnJVjCga2nY3at2qmkPPIsL29bmwtGK6QE9uUgpq6 NlpNg1S8hbgtTyAhKF7UsLSeuSMJTjmRjnU1VmT1rSupx1jAc3dxLKz2/wBWp6rsoLDqY5e8 VlcRPV5sPf8AL1e6s+rXoUlWTU0uI7HmR5byFuccksPlZWkcueB/jU9Wu2Oj1mPfmdqU2+Ts GOsIbu4Y5cq1/c5ehVhy7xrw28LPcZLXi/C4y2nUlBTlXZj7okCrNpdL5aNV3l/xe0rtsiNC wRxHGlADAK+sogd4rWr7s+iaogoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAo CgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCg KAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKAoCgKD/2Q== --------------020809070402020003070800-- --------------080603060906040403030807-- --===============0920653953== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0920653953==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 28 01:00:18 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CACA3A6A98; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:00:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.893 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.270, BAYES_50=0.001, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pYE24gHf+ISI; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:00:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ADED28C140; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:00:13 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7878728C41E for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:00:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wpvl0d0YCrQt for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:00:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from bay0-omc2-s13.bay0.hotmail.com (bay0-omc2-s13.bay0.hotmail.com [65.54.246.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C262A28C140 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:00:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from BAY104-W22 ([65.54.175.122]) by bay0-omc2-s13.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 01:00:04 -0800 Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [62.23.212.160] From: rachid rachid To: Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:00:04 +0000 Importance: Normal MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Feb 2008 09:00:04.0397 (UTC) FILETIME=[4EF2D5D0:01C879E8] Subject: [mpls] LDP on linux fedora5 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0204146866==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============0204146866== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_02eaca85-b180-4e0f-be7d-5b19ab3b48b7_" --_02eaca85-b180-4e0f-be7d-5b19ab3b48b7_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello All, I want to install and configure my linux (fedora5) to support LD= P, i know that quagga is used for that, did someone has any idea? documenta= tion? how to configure it and how it work? is there any experimentation is = made? Thanks for your Help.R.Benbrahim _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/= --_02eaca85-b180-4e0f-be7d-5b19ab3b48b7_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello All,
 
I want to install and configure my linux (fedora5) = to support LDP, i know that quagga is used for that, did someone has any id= ea? documentation? how to configure it and how it work? is there any experi= mentation is made?
 
Thanks for your Help.
R.Benbrahim
<= hr />Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger = --_02eaca85-b180-4e0f-be7d-5b19ab3b48b7_-- --===============0204146866== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0204146866==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 28 07:48:00 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C373A28C7AC; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:48:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.609 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.609 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.172, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nntIZiICqOkf; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:47:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B27C3A6A8D; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:47:23 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 529AE3A67AF for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:47:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IksaYaOSuzNV for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:47:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (mailgw4.ericsson.se [193.180.251.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13A103A6A8D for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:47:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 8638121777; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:17:22 +0100 (CET) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3e-aa1febb000000b15-69-47c6d082df68 Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.123]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 72D1920567; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:17:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from esealmw116.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.7]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:17:22 +0100 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:17:21 +0100 Message-ID: <53CCFDD6E346CB43994852666C210E910262476D@esealmw116.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <47B9B1AB.1020802@pi.se> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) Thread-Index: AchyTyA+R1KX2fhrRiCN5Bfpv6GCEAHzXBgw References: <47B9B1AB.1020802@pi.se> From: "Attila Takacs" To: "Loa Andersson" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Feb 2008 15:17:22.0212 (UTC) FILETIME=[04234640:01C87A1D] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Cc: Ross Callon , David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi all, Some minor comments on the two drafts. Best regards, Attila ->draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02: Section 2: maybe you can remove the PathErr messages format ->draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-10: Section 6.1 paragraph 2: Reword, hard to follow the message. Section 7: Regarding interoperability: The text is not clear on how the Soft Preemption Desired bit in the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE Object is handled. Is it allowed that an LSR tries to soft preempt an LSP which had not requested this explicitly by setting the Soft Preemption Desired bit? If not, than remove the last sentence of the first paragraph: "As a consequence, the soft preempted TE LSP will not be rerouted with make before break by the head-end LSR." In any case, it would be useful to elaborate on this aspect a bit more. > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Loa Andersson > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 5:26 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Cc: Ross Callon; David Ward > Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents > (PathErr and SoftPreemption) > > Working Group, > > this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group > documents: > > "Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource > ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" > > > > and > > "MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" > > > > The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It > has been "on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID > defining the term "Hard preemption"; the working group > considered that that document was required to progress the > soft preemption document. This document is the > "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. > Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. > > Please send your comments to the working group mailing list > prior to EOB March 3. > > Loa and George > > > > > > > -- > Loa Andersson > > Principal Networking Architect > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > loa@pi.se > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Feb 28 23:28:55 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D05593A6BEE; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:28:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.597 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.160, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id naFyR3Yi1Clr; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:28:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA22428C1ED; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:28:20 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77C8F28C4F4 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:28:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PeCkKkl+2-fh for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:28:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw.testbed.se (smtp.testbed.se [80.86.78.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2C2E28C182 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:27:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from MailerDaemon by fw.testbed.se with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JUzeG-0000C4-Oj for mpls@ietf.org; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:27:16 +0100 Received: from 117.14.dhcp.conference.apricot.net ([169.223.14.117]:3261) by fw.testbed.se with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JUzeF-0000By-3Q; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:27:15 +0100 Message-ID: <47C7B3C7.4030902@pi.se> Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:27:03 +0100 From: Loa Andersson Organization: Acreo AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org, George Swallow , David Ward X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Subject: [mpls] mpls wg agenda for Philadelphia X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org All, we are working to compile the mpls wg agenda for the Philadelphia meeting, we will have online on Monday or Tuesday, which probably is later than optimal. Currently we've captured the following requests for agenda slots wg status (Loa and George) report on t-mpls (Stewart and Ross) draft-amante-oam-ng-requirements-01.txt (Shane) draft-manral-mpls-ldp-ipv6-00.txt (Rajiv) MPLS and GMPLS Security Framework (Luyuan) LDP IGP Synch (Luyuan) draft-satoru-mpls-bgp-multipoint-05.txt (Satoru Matsushima) If we missed any request for agenda slots please let us know! BTW - it is still possible to send request for agenda slots. Loa and George -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Feb 29 14:51:00 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5266A28C8E9; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:51:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.313 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.313 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.124, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L8mh0gm48YxC; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:50:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4CF63A6D29; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:50:54 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C58263A685C for ; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:50:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vnWzym0wZE74 for ; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:50:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from esc91.midphase.com (esc91.midphase.com [216.104.42.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF2C73A6D29 for ; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:50:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from esc91.midphase.com ([216.104.33.66] helo=LC2.labn.net) by esc91.midphase.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JVE3n-0004xW-J0; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:50:35 -0500 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:50:34 -0500 To: Loa Andersson From: Lou Berger In-Reply-To: <47B9B1AB.1020802@pi.se> References: <47B9B1AB.1020802@pi.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - esc91.midphase.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net Message-Id: <20080229225044.EF2C73A6D29@core3.amsl.com> Cc: Ross Callon , mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and Soft Preemption) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org At 11:26 AM 2/18/2008, Loa Andersson wrote: >"MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" > > > >The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been >"on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the >term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that that document >was required to progress the soft preemption document. This document >is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. >Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. > >Please send your comments to the working group mailing list prior to >EOB March 3. I feel a bit like I'm tilting at a windmill raising this at such a late date, but - hay - this is part of the reason to have a WG last call. I think the functional objective of the draft, i.e., being able to remotely request/trigger make-before-break, is very important but have a real concern about the specified mechanism. Specifically it seems to me that triggering ingress behavior (MBB) based on RRO flags is a pretty MAJOR departure from intended/typical RRO usage and the RSVP object transaction model. Also, and probably more significantly, I know this draft has been around for a *really* long, but in the interim RFC4920 has been published as a Standards Track document and it too supports the ability to trigger "End-to-end Re-routing". This seems to exactly duplicate the function of soft-preemption. Having two ways to do the same thing is usually considered a bad thing. While fairly painful, perhaps the best thing would be for the WG to either: (a) ask for the current document to revised to leverage 4920 mechanisms, or (b) change the Intended status of this draft to informational Again, I know either will be painful for the Author's of the draft, but I think either is less painful from an overall standards/technology standpoint. Independent of the above, I have some other comments on the draft (in its current form): 1. There are other sources of soft preemption (aka remote MBB request), e.g., graceful shutdown, and they should be allowed under document. I believe this only impacts narrative text. 2. There's no general discussion on how/when RROs are added, e.g., what to do when the incoming message doesn't include an RRO. 3. The draft should address the case were the presence/insertion of the RRO results in a message being too large. (which may occur at an upstream or downstream node.) 4. The draft should address handling of RRO when crossing domain boundaries. That's it for now... Lou _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls