Subject: Re: [PWE3] draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap-06.txt Last Call

From: Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:18:35 +0000

I would like to start a (hopefully) final last call on the
Fiber Channel draft

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap-07

As you can see there are a couple of issues that David Black
raises. The first is easily fixed, the second is more
difficult. On the face of it the right thing to do is to
use a new status code, but on the other hand there are
only 31 values available so we need to be suitably
parsimonious.

If we do decide to us a common value with dynamic-ms-pw
I propose to make this the allocating document since
it will get to the IESG first.

Last call will close 29th Feb 2008, so please can
we have any additional comments by then.

Thanks

Stewart

Moran Roth wrote:
> Stewart,
>
> I would suggest to address the small clean-up issues David mentioned as
> part of the WGLC, since this may bring up more such issues.
>
> Thanks,
> Moran
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 10:16 PM
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [PWE3] draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap-06.txt Last Call
>
> The -07 version of the FC-PW draft addresses most of the congestion
> control issue around CIR.  There are still a few small things to clean
> up:
>
> (1) A reference needs to be cited for R_A_TOV and a sentence should be
> added to stat that the default value of R_A_TOV is 10 seconds.  R_A_TOV
> is defined in section 20.2.1.4 of FC-FS-2:
>
> [FC-FS-2] "Fibre Channel Framing and Signaling-2 (FC-FS-2)",
> 		ANSI INCITS 424:2007, August 2006.
>
> (2) The PW status of "Bandwidth resources unavailable" is defined by
> draft-ietf-pwe3-dynamic-ms-pw.  This raises a couple of concerns:
> - The dynamic-ms-pw draft defines that PW status for PW
> 	setup failure when the requested bandwidth resources
> 	for the PS aren't available, and hence the PW can't
> 	be created.  That status code is being used here for
> 	loss of bandwidth after the PW is up and running.
> 	I'm not sure whether that's a good idea, vs.
> 	defining a new PW status code.
> - The IANA registration of that PW status code is
> 	temporary because the dynamic-ms-pw draft is still
> 	in the pwe3 WG.  If that PW status is to be re-used,
> 	a normative reference to the dynamic-ms-pw draft
> 	appears to be needed from the FC PW draft.
>
> Thanks,
> --David
> ----------------------------------------------------
> David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
> EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
> +1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
> [email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
> ----------------------------------------------------
>   

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3