Works for me. So " The EAG sub-TLV is used in addition to the Administrative Groups when an operator wants to make more than 32 colors available for advertisement in a network"
I had gone back and forth with Adrian on language to scope this to a single LSDB, so as to avoid the discussion of signaling EAG desire in RSVP or PCEP. I don't want to add that sort of disclaimer here too, as it makes the sentence clunky and unweildy. eric On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Joel Halpern Direct <[email protected]> wrote: > What if instead of "on the link" it is simoply "in the network". This > recommend the use of EAG whenever the operators is using more than 32 colors > across the link. It thus actually better aligns with avoiding the > under-claiming issue by suggesting that operators should use the EAG if they > have more than 32 candidate colors. > > Yours, > Joel > > PS: substituting wants for wishes is probably reasonable. If we talk about > network-wide you might even be able to us "intends". > > > On 4/25/14, 10:06 AM, Eric Osborne wrote: >> >> Hi Joel- >> >> Thanks for the review. On your minor issue: >> --- >> I believe it is more accurate to say that it is to be used "when a >> node wishes to advertise colors for a link which are not represented >> in the first 32 bits of the color mask." The node may only wish to >> advertise colors 7 and 60, but that will require the EAG. >> --- >> >> I see your point, but I'm having trouble coming up with obvious text. >> Deciding which colors are represented in a color mask is up to the >> operator, which means it would have to say something like >> >> "when a node wishes to advertise colors for a link which the operator >> has defined to be outside the first 32 bits of the color mask". >> >> but this would be the only use of 'color mask' in the document, and >> it's not one I've seen used in any other docs around link coloring. >> >> The whole sentence you refer to is: >> >> " The EAG sub-TLV is used in addition to the Administrative Groups >> when a node wishes to advertise more than 32 colors for a link." >> >> If I rephrased it as >> >> " The EAG sub-TLV is used in addition to the Administrative Groups >> when an operator wants to make more than 32 colors available for >> advertisement on a link" >> >> would that do it? >> s/wishes/wants/ while I'm here. >> >> >> >> eric >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Joel M. Halpern <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on >>> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at >>> >>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. >>> >>> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments >>> you may receive. >>> >>> Document: draft-ietf-mpls-extended-admin-group-05 >>> Extended Administrative Groups in MPLS-TE >>> Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern >>> Review Date: 24-April-2014 >>> IETF LC End Date: 06-May-2014 >>> IESG Telechat date: N/A >>> >>> Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standards >>> RFC >>> >>> Major issues: N/A >>> >>> Minor issues: >>> I believe that the description of when to use this EAG is slightly >>> misleading. The text says that EAG is to be used "when a node wishes to >>> advertise more than 32 colors for a link." I believe it is more accurate >>> to >>> say that it is to be used "when a node wishes to advertise colors for a >>> link >>> which are not represented in the first 32 bits of the color mask." The >>> node >>> may only wish to advertise colors 7 and 60, but that will require the >>> EAG. >>> >>> Nits/editorial comments: N/A >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
