Subject: [mpls] mpls working groups last call on draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-typed-wildcard-00

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:11:06 +0200

Working Group,

this is to initiate a two week working group last call
on the working group draft "LDP Typed Wildcard FEC".

The document will be found at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-typed-wildcard-00

Please review and sent your comments to the mailing list or
directly to the working group co-chairs.

The working group last call will end EOB March 11 PDT.

Loa and George

-- 
Loa Andersson

Principal Networking Architect
Acreo AB                           phone:  +46 8 632 77 14
Isafjordsgatan 22                  mobile: +46 739 81 21 64
Kista, Sweden                      email:  [email-masked]
                                           [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

---

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:40:52 +0200

All,

Luyuan told me I meant "April 11!, and he is right :) .

/Loa

-- 
Loa Andersson

---

From: "Metz, E.T. \(Eduard\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:13:53 +0200

A few comments / questions:

----
Is the intention of the Typed Wildcard FEC element to replace or to be
complementary to the existing Wildcard FEC type? Perhaps this could be
briefly clarified in the draft. While reading I wondered whether it is
possible to do same with the Typed Wildcard FEC as can be done with the
Wildcard FEC Type, ie if a Prefix Typed Wildcard FEC (as specified in
section 5) is followed by a Label TLV should be behavior be expected to
be same as that of the Wildcard FEC Type (e.g. in a Label release)?

----
Section 4:
   Receipt of a Label Request message with a FEC TLV containing a Typed
   Wildcard FEC Element is interpreted as a request to send a Label
   Mapping for all FECs of the type specified by the FEC Element type in
   the Typed Wildcard FEC Element encoding.

=> replace "FEC Element type" with "FEC type"? Assuming FEC type refers
to all the information carried in the in Typed WC FEC Element regarding
the FEC, not just the FEC Element type. FEC type also seems to be used
in other parts of the document.

----
The suggested FEC Type seems to be in use in already:
0x04        CR-LSP                              [RFC3212]

----
The draft specifies the Typed Wildcard FEC element for the Prefix FEC
type. Does this imply that for the other FEC types defined in the LDP
RFC (Wildcard and Host-address) typed wildcarding is not required (or
not allowed)?

cheers,
	Eduard 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Loa Andersson [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: woensdag 28 maart 2007 15:11
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: Ross Callon; David Ward
> Subject: [mpls] mpls working groups last call 
> ondraft-ietf-mpls-ldp-typed-wildcard-00
> 
> Working Group,
> 

This e-mail and its contents are subject to the DISCLAIMER at http://www.tno.nl/disclaimer/email.html

---

From: "Bob Thomas \(rhthomas\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 09:00:05 -0400

Eduard,

Thanks for your comments.  Please search for #bt for some follow up.

Bob

> Is the intention of the Typed Wildcard FEC element to replace 
> or to be complementary to the existing Wildcard FEC type? 

#bt
The intent is to be complementary to the existing Wildcard FEC type.

> Perhaps this could be briefly clarified in the draft. While 
> reading I wondered whether it is possible to do same with the 
> Typed Wildcard FEC as can be done with the Wildcard FEC Type, 
> ie if a Prefix Typed Wildcard FEC (as specified in section 5) 
> is followed by a Label TLV should be behavior be expected to 

#bt
Roughly speaking yes.  More precisely, a Label Release message carrying
an rfc3036 Wildcard FEC Type in the FEC TLV and a Label TLV would cause
the specified label to be released for all FECs regardless of type.  A
Label Release message carrying a Typed Wildcard FEC Element in the FEC
TLV and a Label TLV would cause the specified label to be released for
all FECs of the  specified type.

> => replace "FEC Element type" with "FEC type"? Assuming FEC 
> type refers to all the information carried in the in Typed WC 
> FEC Element regarding the FEC, not just the FEC Element type. 
> FEC type also seems to be used in other parts of the document.

#bt:
I think the text:

   ... FEC Element type in the Typed Wildcard FEC
   Element encoding.

in the above should be replaced by the text:

   ... FEC Element Type field in the Typed Wildcard
   FEC Element encoding.

I agree that the use of "FEC type" in other parts of the document are
OK.

> The suggested FEC Type seems to be in use in already:

#bt:
Thanks for pointing that out.  It will be corrected in the next revision
of the draft.

> ----
> The draft specifies the Typed Wildcard FEC element for the 
> Prefix FEC type. Does this imply that for the other FEC types 
> defined in the LDP RFC (Wildcard and Host-address) typed 
> wildcarding is not required (or not allowed)?

#bt:
The Host Address type is being removed from LDP (see the latest revision
of draft-ietf-mpls-rfc3036bis-xx.txt).  The motivation for the typed
wildcard draft is to correct deficiencies in the rfc3036 Wildcard FEC
type.

Thanks,
Bob

> > this is to initiate a two week working group last call on 
> the working 
> > group draft "LDP Typed Wildcard FEC".
> >