Hi all,

I think a new object type could be better and simple.

Thanks

Fatai


发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Ramon Casellas
发送时间: 2013年7月30日 17:32
收件人: Jonathan Hardwick; [email protected]
主题: Re: [Pce] Comments on draft-ietf-pce-gmpls-pcep-extensions-08

On 07/30/2013 11:08 AM, Jonathan Hardwick wrote:
Cyril and I had an offline conversation about these comments.  This email is to 
document the discussion for the benefit of the mailing list.  See [JEH-MC] 
comments below.

We have one question for the WG, as follows.  If anyone has an opinion on this, 
please could you provide it to the mailing list?

---
[JEH-MC] Jon believes that this draft should relax the restriction of RFC 5440 
that the BANDWIDTH object is mandatory, in the case where a 
GENERALIZED-BANDWIDTH is supplied instead.  This would mean changing existing 
procedures, the initial mechanism was not to change RFC5440 object presence 
rule.  Cyril is fine with the proposal from Jonathan, but we would like to get 
WG and implementers feedback.


Jon, Cyril, all

In this case, I would go back to one of my initial suggestions: do not add 
GENERALIZED_BANDWIDTH and add a TLV to the BW objects, which can be ignored.

In other words, the creation of GEN_BW was justified due to:  a) do not touch 
rfc5440 b) if RFC5440 does not state that BW object can have TLVs, then they 
can't and it is fixed length.

My personal preference always was to add a TLV or a new object type for BW.  If 
we allow ourselves a liberal interpretation of rfc5440 then let's assume we can 
add a tlv...

Just my opinion, of course, and not a particularly strong one

Ramon



--

Ramon Casellas, Ph.D. -- Senior Research Associate -- Networks Division

Optical Networks and Systems Department -- http://wikiona.cttc.es

CTTC - Centre Tecnològic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya

Parc Mediterrani de la Tecnologia (PMT) - Edifici B4

Av. Carl Friedrich Gauss, 7 - 08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona) - Spain

Tel.: +34 93 645 29 00 ext 2168-- Fax. +34 93 645 29 01
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to