Subject: RE: New TTL Draft

From: Shahram Davari <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:41:04 -0800

Hi Eric,

>     I see no reason why Puneet's draft should affect TTL processing
> in intermediate LSRs.  I believe this is well defined elsewhere.

Sure, but first the authors should decide what is the objective of this draft? Is it explaining the TTL processing after pop or push, in other words is it explaining the TTL processing at tunnel ingress/egress/penultimate? or is it a general TTL processing draft that explains TTL processing at any node be it intermediate or tunnel ingress/egress/penultimate?

It seems that the authors intend to talk only about tunnel ingress/egress/penultimate TTL processing. If that is the case then the draft is misleading because neither the title nor the text reflect this. Also section 2.3 second paragraph talks about iTTL determination for push/"SWAP"/php. Which means it is talking about iTTL determination for a "SWAP" case too, which is intermediate TTL processing. 

>     By the way, an LSR that pops a label is not an intermediate LSR
> with respect to the LSP for which that label applied.
>

Yes, I guess I know that.

Thanks,
-Shahram

---

From: Bora Akyol <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:35:04 -0800

Shahram

Puneet has been handling this thread while I dealt with the ERO draft 
related calls, but if there is something missing in the draft as you 
pointed out, we will fix it.

Our goal is to explain in general how TTL processing works in 
**hierarchical** MPLS networks.

We asked for an agenda slot for this draft, so we can discuss this in 
more detail in Minn.

Bora

At 8:41 AM -0800 2/28/01, Shahram Davari wrote:
>Sure, but first the authors should decide what is the objective of 
>this draft? Is it explaining the TTL processing after pop or push, 
>in other words is it explaining the TTL processing at tunnel 
>ingress/egress/penultimate? or is it a general TTL processing draft 
>that explains TTL processing at any node be it intermediate or 
>tunnel ingress/egress/penultimate?
>
>It seems that the authors intend to talk only about tunnel 
>ingress/egress/penultimate TTL processing. If that is the case then 
>the draft is misleading because neither the title nor the text 
>reflect this. Also section 2.3 second paragraph talks about iTTL 
>determination for push/"SWAP"/php. Which means it is talking about 
>iTTL determination for a "SWAP" case too, which is intermediate TTL 
>processing.
>