The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] bug in draft-ietf-rsvp-lsp-tunel-04 ?
Yes, it is mandatory as was discussed on the mailing list some time back. Please see the attached mail (from last discussion) for more details. Rohit Sridhar Komandur wrote: > > Hi, > > Section 3.2 (page 14) currently has > <FF flow descriptor> ::= [ <FLOWSPEC> ] <FILTER_SPEC> <LABEL> > [ <RECORD_ROUTE> ] > > i.e FLOWSPEC is optional, while this is illegal in classical rsvp (rfc2205). > Shouldn't flowspec be mandatory ? > > thanks, > > - Andy Malis, Jack Shaio, Sridhar Komandur -- Rohit Chhapolia Globespan, Inc. mailto:rohit@globespan.net http://www.globespan.net
Subject: Re: RSVP: Usage of FlowSpec
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 10:40:23 -0500
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
To: Rohit Chhapolia <rohit@ficon-tech.com>
CC: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, MPLS WG <mpls@UU.NET>, swallow@cisco.com
At 10:05 AM 12/16/99 -0500, Rohit Chhapolia wrote:
>Lou,
>
> > >- In the rsvp-tunnel-04 draft (section 3.2), FlowSpec is defined
> > >to be optional when the reservation style is FF but it is mandatory
> > >for SE. Is this intentional? If yes, why so?
> >
> > I think the text is ambiguous. There should be at least 1 FlowSpec for
FF,
> > see the format in rfc2205. It's clear there, but obviously doesn't
include
> > labels. It would be good for the text to be clear on this.
>
>The SenderTSpec is optional in the PATH message to allow creating LSP which
>does not have any QoS associated with it.
Rohit,
This is a bug in the document. Sender description should read:
<sender descriptor> ::= <SENDER_TEMPLATE> <SENDER_TSPEC>
[ <ADSPEC> ]
[ <RECORD_ROUTE> ]
i.e., sender_tspec is always required. If you don't want QoS, a
Class-of-Service SENDER_TSPEC object with a CoS value of 0 should be used.
Thanks for pointing this out.
> In this case, the RESV message
>generated from egress node need not have any FlowSpec in it. If one must
>be provided, what should be the contents of this object?
Class-of-Service FLOWSPEC object.
> > >- In the native RSVP,
> >
> > what does that mean?
>
>Just a colloquial for rfc2205.
>
> > > let's assume that the style is SE and there are
> ^^
> FF
> > >multiple FilterSpecs in the RESV message. In this case, if FlowSpec is
not
> > >present before second FilterSpec, it should be assumed that it is same
as
> > >the FlowSpec for first FilterSpec. Since, (if) FlowSpec is optional
> for mpls-rsvp,
> > >this rule can cause a problem. The absence of FlowSpec can also be
> interpreted
> > >as no FlowSpec is desired for this FilterSpec. There is some ambiguity
> here.
> >
> > in the question too. There's always 1 FlowSpec for SE.
>
>Sorry, no issues for SE here. Please read this question with SE replaced
>by FF.
With the above, I think this should no be clear.
Thanks,
Lou
>Rohit
>--
>Rohit Chhapolia
>Ficon Technology, Inc.
>mailto:rohit@ficon-tech.com
>http://www.ficon-tech.com
|
|