This can be easily fixed by replacing "highest" with "high" in the current text. Would that work?
Cheers, Manav > -----Original Message----- > From: Tal Mizrahi [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 10.43 PM > To: Bhatia, Manav (Manav); Shahram Davari; [email protected] > Subject: RE: Transporting PTP messages (1588) over MPLS Networks > > Hi Manav, Shahram, > > > > > 10. QoS Considerations > > - I am not sure I understand why this is a MUST. This draft > > defines an encapsulation, while the QoS requirements are > > typically be derived from the application, which is defined > elsewhere. > > > > SD> The application is PTP, which requires low delay. Are you > > suggesting we make it a should? > > > >The current text does not use a MUST. Does that look ok? > > The current wording is "The PTP messages are time critical > and must be treated with the highest priority.", > while the IEEE 1588 states in the informative Annex A that > "PTP event messages should be sent with high priority > compared with other data whenever possible." > Of course it makes sense that PTP is high priority, but the > current wording seems a bit too stringent. > > Thanks. > Tal. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bhatia, Manav (Manav) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 6:54 PM > To: Shahram Davari; Tal Mizrahi; [email protected] > Subject: RE: Transporting PTP messages (1588) over MPLS Networks > > Hi Tal, > > In addition to what Shahram has said: > > > 6. 1588 Message Transport > > "If Two Step Transparent clocks are present, then the > > FOLLOW_UP and DELAY_RESP messages must also be transported > > over the PTP LSPs." > > - for P2P TCs you also need the PDelay_Resp_Follow_Up. > > > > SD> AFAIK These messages don't require time stamping and > > therefore don't have to be transported over PTP LSP. > > The PDelay_Resp_Follow_Up message will never go through a TC > and will never have its CF modified. In the case of a non-TC > PTP LSR, it is only the PDelay_Req and PDelay-Resp message > that are time sensitive. So the PDelay_Resp_Follow_Up can be > sent outside of the PTP LSP. > > > > > 10. QoS Considerations > > - I am not sure I understand why this is a MUST. This draft > > defines an encapsulation, while the QoS requirements are > > typically be derived from the application, which is defined > elsewhere. > > > > SD> The application is PTP, which requires low delay. Are you > > suggesting we make it a should? > > The current text does not use a MUST. Does that look ok? > > Cheers, Manav > _______________________________________________ TICTOC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc
