The MPLS WG Archive

[Jonathan Lang <jplang@calient.net>]

Spencer,
  Backup CCIds are listed in the Protection channel subobjects of the
LinkSummary message.  Recall from the text in Section 8.5.1 that the "list
of working channels MUST include the control channel".  The identification
of backup control channels is mentioned in the Protection Channel subobject
format.  To make things clear, I can add to the LinkSummary text  as follows
(new text in <<>>):

   "The LinkSummary message contains a list of working channel 
   subobjects and protection channel subobjects.  The list of working 
   channels MUST include the control channel.  <<Any backup control channels
that
   are defined MUST be included in the list of protection channel
subobjects.  Note that
   a backup control channel can also be a working component link (provided
it has
   preemptive priority over the working component link), so it is possible
to appear
   in both the working channel subobject as well as the protection channel
subobject.>>"


-Jonathan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dawkins, Spencer [mailto:Spencer.DAWKINS@fnc.fujitsu.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2000 12:26 PM
> To: 'IETF MPLS mailing list'
> Subject: LinkSummary in draft-lang-mpls-lmp-01.txt missing fields?
> 
> 
> The text in Section 6.0 of this draft says
> 
>    "The LinkSummary message contains the primary 
>    and backup CCIds, the IP address for the link (binding the 
> CCIds to 
>    the link IP addresses), and the local and remote LinkIds for each 
>    component link and their associated priorities."
> 
> but I don't see the backup CCIds in the LinkSummary message 
> described in
> 8.5.1:
> 
>  The format of the LinkSummary 
>    message is as follows: 
>     
>    <LinkSummary Message> ::= <Common Header> <LinkSummary> 
>     
>    The LinkSummary Object has the following format: 
>     
>     0                   1                   2                   3 
>     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
>    |                          MessageId                            | 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
>    |                     Interface IP Address                      | 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
>    |                          NumWorking                           | 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
>    |                        NumProtection                          | 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
>    |                                                               | 
>    //                 (working channel subobjects)                // 
>    |                                                               | 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
>    |                                                               | 
>    //               (protection channel subobjects)               // 
>    |                                                               | 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
> 
> and the Common Header looks like
> 
>    In addition to the standard IP header, all LMP control-channel 
>    messages have the following common header: 
>     
>     0                   1                   2                   3 
>     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
>    | Vers  |    Flags      |    Msg Type   |   (Reserved)          | 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
>    |                      Control Channel Id                       | 
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
> 
> Am I missing something obvious?
> 
> Spencer
>