The MPLS WG Archive

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Forwarding to MPLS WG, cause I think these discussion should be
in the OPEN and on the WG list

Thanks,
Bert 

-----Original Message-----
From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) 
Sent: dinsdag 30 september 2003 16:31
To: 'Joan Cucchiara x302'; 'tnadeau@cisco.com'; 'Kireeti Kompella';
'swallow@cisco.com'; 'loa@pi.se'; Wijnen, Bert (Bert);
'mrm@riverstone.net'; 'zinin@psg.com'; 'adrian@olddog.co.uk'
Cc: arunv@force10networks.com; hans@ipunplugged.com;
jcucchiara@mindspring.com; cheenu@alumni.princeton.edu
Subject: RE: draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-06a.txt


Inline

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joan Cucchiara x302 [mailto:jcucchiara@Artel.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 30 september 2003 15:29
> To: 'tnadeau@cisco.com'; 'Kireeti Kompella'; Joan Cucchiara x302;
> 'swallow@cisco.com'; 'loa@pi.se'; 'bwijnen@lucent.com';
> 'mrm@riverstone.net'; 'zinin@psg.com'; 'adrian@olddog.co.uk'
> Cc: arunv@force10networks.com; hans@ipunplugged.com;
> jcucchiara@mindspring.com; cheenu@alumni.princeton.edu
> Subject: RE: draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-06a.txt
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Kireeti,
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas D. Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@cisco.com]
> > Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 12:26 PM
> > To: 'Kireeti Kompella'; 'Joan Cucchiara x302'
> > Cc: arunv@force10networks.com; hans@ipunplugged.com;
> > jcucchiara@mindspring.com; cheenu@alumni.princeton.edu
> > Subject: RE: draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-06a.txt
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:kireeti@juniper.net] 
> > >Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 11:46 AM
> > >To: Joan Cucchiara x302
> > >Cc: arun@force10networks.com; cheenu@paramanet.com; 
> > >hans@ipunplugged.com; jcucchiara@mindspring.com; 
> > >tnadeau@cisco.com; Kireeti Kompella
> > >Subject: RE: draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-06a.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >Hi Joan et al,
> > >
> > >In a review of the TE MIB, I was asked to explain why hops in general
> > >could include AS numbers.  I think that the best place to explain that
> > >would be in the TC MIB, rather than every place that the Hop TCs are
> > >used.  If you all agree, I will supply text to go in the description.
> 
> Can we check with Bert and Mike on this?  I am not opposed but would
> like to make sure it is okay with Bert and Mike from MIB Dr.
> point of view?
> 
> Am cc'ing the larger group of folks. Hope that is okay!
> 
I am OK and all for better descriptions. So adding text as to why 
AS numbers and unnumbered links is a Good Thing I think.
It will not change semantix, it will only clarify (better explain)
things.

More below

>    thanks, Joan
> 
> 
> > >
> > >BTW, looking at the MPLS TE MIB, I see that I don't understand TCs!
> > >The MplsTunnelHopEntry is:
> > >
> > >MplsTunnelHopEntry ::= SEQUENCE {
> > >      mplsTunnelHopListIndex          MplsPathIndex,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopPathOptionIndex    MplsPathIndex,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopIndex              MplsPathIndex,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopAddrType           TeHopAddressType,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopIpAddr             TeHopAddress,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopIpPrefixLen        InetAddressPrefixLength,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopAsNumber           TeHopAddressAS,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopAddrUnnum          TeHopAddressUnnum,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopLspId              MplsLSPID,
> > >      <etc>
> > >
> > >I was under the impression that one could just have:
> > >MplsTunnelHopEntry ::= SEQUENCE {
> > >      mplsTunnelHopListIndex          MplsPathIndex,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopPathOptionIndex    MplsPathIndex,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopIndex              MplsPathIndex,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopAddrType           TeHopAddressType,
> > >      mplsTunnelHopIpAddr             TeHopAddress,
> > >      <etc>
> > >
> > >as the TeHopAddress TC includes AS and unnum ...  I guess that is
> > >wrong?
> > 
> > 	The AS and UnNum are in separate objects
> > so that they can be represented that way
> > (rather than say an opaque octet string).
> > 
Mmm... I believe I have repeatedly question the same.
We have the TeHopAddress and TeHopAddressType TCs, so that we basically
have a discriminated union, and so that we do NOT need multiple columns
to represent the different types of addressed.

You are not telling me that this slipped thorugh my latest review,
are you?

Bert
> > 	--Tom
> > 
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >Kireeti.
> > >
> > 
>