The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2002-Mar> msg00270



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

-04 version

  • From: Nabil Seddigh <nseddigh@tropicnetworks.com>
  • Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 16:30:26 -0500
  • CC: mpls@UU.NET
  • Organization: Tropic Networks

Yakov,

In addition to the changes mentioned below, there is one more 
fundamental issue with the Unnumbered Interfaces draft. 

>From previous discussion on this list, it appears that the 
Interface ID field of the unnumbered ERO subobject is intended
to represent the incoming interface of the next hop router.
If this is the case, it should be explicitly stated at
the beginning of section 6.

If the intention is to leave it open such that it is either
incoming or outgoing interface then a bit from the reserved
field of  the sub-object should indicate which of the two 
choices is being used.

In the absence of one of the above two alternatives, we would
appear to have a case of ambiguity by design - not usually 
preferred when you are standardizing something.

Best,
Nabil Seddigh


Yakov Rekhter wrote:
> 
> Nabil,
> 
> > Yakov,
> >
> > I suggest adding a section with title error handling - between
> > section 6.2 and section 7. Having its own section is good as one
> > would typically expect a note on error handling in this kind of
> > a draft.  The section could indicate something  like:
> >
> >  Section 7.0
> >  -----------
> >  "In order to indicate the interfaces on which a particular error
> >   occured, a new IF_ID ERROR_SPEC object is defined. The definitions
> >   can be found in draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-06.txt and
> >   draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signaling-07.txt"
> >
> > Also section 6.1 indicates that the LSR should return error.
> > However, it does not specify whether the PathErr message
> > will contain an existing error code or a new one to
> > be defined by IANA. Could you clarify.
> 
> -05 version of the draft (just announced) addresses this.
> 
> Yakov.
> 
> >
> > ---
> > Best,
> > Nabil Seddigh
> > nseddigh@tropicnetworks.com
> >
> >
> > > > 2. Also, if the unnum draft is not going to talk about error spec
> > > >   it should reference the draft that defines the new
> > > >   error_spec object for unnumbered links -
> > > >   draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-06.txt
> > >
> > > please tell me where would you like to insert the reference,
> > > and I'll add it.
> > >
> > > Yakov.
> > >


  • References: