Subject: Last call for draft-ietf-mpls-framework-04.txt

From: Vijay Srinivasan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 11:44:21 -0400

We would like to progress draft-ietf-mpls-framework-04.txt (A Framework
for Multiprotocol Label Switching) to last call.  Please submit comments
to the mailing list.

Last call will end on Wednesday, September 1, 5 pm US EDT.

- Vijay

---

From: Adrian Farrel <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 20:34:32 +0100

Vijay,

There are a bunch of typographic errors which I couldn't help noticing as I
re-read the document.  These are included below for your delectation ;-)  I
hope this level of nit picking is acceptable.

My two main questions are as follows.  Apologies if they have already been
discussed.

1. Section 4.1.4 on LDP Reliability seems too strong.  It is true that it is
important for at least one LDP developed by the MPLS WG to ensure reliable
delivery of label information, but need it be a requirement for all such
LDPs?  For example, it would be reasonable to specify a light-weight LDP for
use only with reliable hardware/environments where it was not a requirement
to use a reliable transport, nor to build reliability mechanisms into the
LDP itself.

2. Section 4.2 and in particular section 4.2.1 describes the requirements of
VC merge.  It is suggested that the entire AAL5 frame must always be
received before any cells can be forwarded.  While this is generally true,
there may be optimizations where the first frame can start to be forwarded
and only the second (and subsequent) one needs to be buffered.

Regards,
Adrian

==========
Typos

Section 1.3 (terminology).  Label Stack, Label Switching Router and VC Merge
are out of order.

Section 1.5.1.4  Final paragraph.  For "implies" read "imply"

Section 1.5.2.1  Second paragraph.  Several minor errors.  The paragraph
should read...
  "Because all LSRs will run standard routing protocols, the number
   of the peers routers need to communicate with is reduced to the
   number of LSRs and routers a given LSR is directly connected to,
   instead of having to peer with large numbers of routers at the ends
   of the switched L2 paths. This benefit is achieved because the
   edge LSRs do not need to peer with every other edge LSR in the
   domain as is the case on a hybrid switch / router network."

Section 2.2  For "simply" read "simplify"

Section 2.2.1  Final paragraph.  For "effect" read "affect"

Section 3.3  Second paragraph.  For "factor" read "factors"

Section 4.1.1.1  Second paragraph.  For "build" read "builds"

Section 4.1.4  Final paragraph.  For "{" read "("

Section 4.2  Missing close brace ")" after "O(n-squared)"

Section 4.2.2  Paragraph three.
   "merged into a single downstream streams" - delete "a"
   For "haardware" read "hardware"

Section 4.3  Paragraph six ("Another basic method...")  For "effect" read
"affect"

Section 4.5.5  Final paragraph.  For "principal" read "principle"
--
Adrian Farrel  mailto:[email-masked]
Data Connection Ltd., Chester, UK
http://www.datcon.co.uk/
Tel: +44 (0) 1244 313440  Fax: +44 (0) 1244 312422

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Vijay Srinivasan [SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Sent:	Wednesday, August 25, 1999 4:44 PM
> To:	[email-masked]
> Cc:	[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject:	Last call for draft-ietf-mpls-framework-04.txt
> 
>