--Tom

On Jan 5, 2012, at 6:37 PM, Greg Mirsky &= lt;gregimirsky@gmail.com> wr= ote:

Dear Tom, et al.= ,
I had to refresh my recollection of the discussion in Taipei. According= to minutes we don't have the decision regarding the use of MIBs to configur= e MPLS-TP objects. Somewhere in my memory stuck that the proposal was to lim= it new MPLS-TP MIBs to R/O and I wonder if it is self-inflicted memory or on= e of options chairs and the WG is looking into.

Regards,
Greg

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 a= t 11:03 AM, Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> wrote:

Stewart,

The question of whether or not to allow "configu= ration" via the OAM protocols (or protocol extensions) was something I raise= d several months ago in PWE3, although it was also discussed in MPLS as I re= call in Taipei as well. It seems to have arisen again. The conclusion= s in PWE3 were to allow configuration of only OAM-related things (i.e.: not a= llowing expansion of the protocols for general configuration). Presumably co= nfiguration via MIBs there is still okay. In MPLS I recall the chairs statin= g that configuration was a thing reserved for NetConf when the question of M= IB-based configuration was raised for WG MIB drafts in general (and in parti= cular WRT to the MPLS-TP MIBs). Those positions seem slightly a= t odds with each other. And now your answer now seems inconsistent wit= h those as well.

Can we get a single answer from the ADs/IESG on t= his that pertains to all MPLS-TP related work?

--Tom

On Jan 3, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Stewart Bryant wrote:

>
>> 2. Will this MIB be enhanced also to configure "*Y.1731 based OAM f= or MPLS-TP*"?
>>
> Without prejudice to any decisions on Y.1731 and MPLS-TP.
>
> Wouldn't such a MIB be a derivative of the Y.1731 MIB?
>
> Stewart
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
htt= ps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

= --Apple-Mail-FA5B4631-8B44-43F4-9590-2D58EF9A7A4E-- From scott.mansfield@ericsson.com Sun Jan 8 05:54:59 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56BE921F857D; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 05:54:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.608 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.608 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.009, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hw2VTqNPz50Q; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 05:54:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A62EB21F857A; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 05:54:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id q08Dslvg030164; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 07:54:50 -0600 Received: from EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.20]) by eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) with mapi; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 08:54:41 -0500 From: Scott Mansfield To: "ietf@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" , "pwe3@ietf.org" , "ccamp@ietf.org" Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2012 08:53:05 -0500 Thread-Topic: New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status of Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration and Maintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN)" Thread-Index: AczN3sDx/mJ/vGigQiGFDbfLLXEytgAKv9cA Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com" , "rcallon@juniper.net" , "andrew.g.malis@verizon.com" , "dbrungard@att.com" Subject: [CCAMP] FW: New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status of Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration and Maintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN)" X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2012 13:54:59 -0000 This is a liaison from the ITU-T SG15 WP3 providing a copy of the Determine= d recommendation G.8113.1 (May 2011). The liaison also provides a pointer = to the internet draft draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point that requests an A= Ch code point that is needed by G.8113.1. This is a liaison that will requ= ire a response and the ITU-T has requested a response no later than 1 Augus= t 2012. I would suggest that we use the liaison response to provide the ou= tcome of running the IETF process required to assign the requested code poi= nt. Regards, -scott. IETF-ITU Liaison Manager for MPLS > -----Original Message----- > From: Liaison Statement Management Tool [mailto:lsmt@ietf.org]=20 > Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 3:23 AM > To: chair@ietf.org > Cc: yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp;=20 > steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com; iesg@ietf.org;=20 > lear@cisco.com; Scott Mansfield; malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn;=20 > tsbsg15@itu.int; greg.jones@itu.int; hiroshi.ota@itu.int > Subject: New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status of=20 > Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations,=20 > Administration and Maintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in=20 > Packet Transport Network (PTN)" >=20 > Title: LS370 - Current status of Recommendation ITU-T=20 > G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration and Maintenance=20 > mechanism for MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN)=20 > Submission Date: 2012-01-08 URL of the IETF Web page: /liaison/1125/ >=20 > From: ITU-T SG 15 (Greg Jones ) > To: The IESG (chair@ietf.org) > Cc:=20 > yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp,steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com,ies > g@ietf.org,lear@cisco.com,Scott.Mansfield@Ericsson.com > Reponse Contact:=20 > tsbsg15@itu.int,greg.jones@itu.int,hiroshi.ota@itu.int > Technical Contact: malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn > Purpose: For information >=20 > Body: The December meeting of ITU-T Study Group 15 considered=20 > the approval of Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1,=20 > Operations, Administration and Maintenance mechanism for=20 > MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN). Unfortunately the=20 > Study Group could not approve this Recommendation so it was=20 > forwarded to the WTSA (20-29 November 2012) for approval. =20 > One of the issues that prevented the approval in SG 15 was=20 > the lack of an ACh code point to support this Recommendation.=20 > To resolve this issue SG 15 therefore requests the IETF to=20 > assign an ACh code point. An IETF draft=20 > draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point has been submitted to=20 > request this code point. > We have attached the text of the current draft of=20 > Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1 that has been=20 > forwarded to the WTSA for approval. > Attach: COM15R-22. >=20 > Attachment(s): >=20 > LS370 - pdf body=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1306.pdf >=20 > LS370 - pdf attachment=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1307.pdf >=20 >=20 > = From scott.mansfield@ericsson.com Sun Jan 8 06:03:02 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B618A21F857F; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 06:03:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.608 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.608 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.009, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T6toldkBkO4w; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 06:03:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FA1521F857A; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 06:03:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q08E2xVd015650 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sun, 8 Jan 2012 08:02:59 -0600 Received: from EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.20]) by eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) with mapi; Sun, 8 Jan 2012 09:02:58 -0500 From: Scott Mansfield To: "ietf@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" , "pwe3@ietf.org" , "ccamp@ietf.org" Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2012 09:01:22 -0500 Thread-Topic: New Liaison Statement, "LS368 - MPLS-TP Recommendations" Thread-Index: AczN4pkSBaUC0mYaQoOGlA/HaKlurQAKkiSA Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com" , "rcallon@juniper.net" , "andrew.g.malis@verizon.com" , "dbrungard@att.com" Subject: [CCAMP] FW: New Liaison Statement, "LS368 - MPLS-TP Recommendations" X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2012 14:03:02 -0000 This is a liaison from SG15 Q9, Q12, and Q14 providing the text of G.8110.1= , G.8121, and G.8151. This liaison is for information only. G.8110.1 was = approved at the SG15 plenary meeting in December 2011. G.8121 and G.8151 e= ntered the alternative approval process (AAP) and will enter a 4 week last = call (the last call hasn't been initiated yet). Regards, -scott. IETF-ITU Liaison Manager for MPLS > -----Original Message----- > From: Liaison Statement Management Tool [mailto:lsmt@ietf.org]=20 > Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 3:51 AM > To: rcallon@juniper.net; swallow@cisco.com; loa@pi.nu > Cc: yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp;=20 > steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com; mpls@ietf.org;=20 > lear@cisco.com; Scott Mansfield; stbryant@cisco.com;=20 > adrian@olddog.co.uk; malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn; Ghani Abbas;=20 > Kam.Lam@alcatel-lucent.com; tsbsg15@itu.int;=20 > greg.jones@itu.int; hiroshi.ota@itu.int > Subject: New Liaison Statement, "LS368 - MPLS-TP Recommendations" >=20 > Title: LS368 - MPLS-TP Recommendations > Submission Date: 2012-01-08 > URL of the IETF Web page: /liaison/1126/ >=20 > From: ITU-T SG 15 (Greg Jones ) > To: Multiprotocol Label Switching (rcallon@juniper.net,=20 > swallow@cisco.com, loa@pi.nu) > Cc:=20 > yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp,steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com,mpl > s@ietf.org,lear@cisco.com,Scott.Mansfield@Ericsson.com,stbryan > t@cisco.com,adrian@olddog.co.uk > Reponse Contact:=20 > tsbsg15@itu.int,greg.jones@itu.int,hiroshi.ota@itu.int > Technical Contact:=20 > malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn,Ghani.Abbas@ericsson.com,Kam.Lam@alca > tel-lucent.com > Purpose: For information >=20 > Body: At the December 2011 meeting of ITU-T Study Group 15,=20 > Recommendation ITU-T G.8110.1/Y.1370.1 "Architecture of MPLS=20 > Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) layer network" was approved. A=20 > copy is attached for your information. =20 > We would like to draw your attention to clause 10 that=20 > describes the MPLS-TP Diff-Serv Architecture. > In addition, the approval process was initiated for=20 > Recommendations ITU-T G.8121/Y.1381 "Characteristics of=20 > MPLS-TP Network Equipment Functional Blocks" and ITU-T=20 > G.8151/Y.1374 "Management aspects of the MPLS-TP network element". >=20 > Attach: TD517/PLEN Rev.3, TD540/PLEN Rev.1, TD543/PLEN Rev.1. >=20 > Attachment(s): >=20 > LS368 - pdf body=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1308.pdf >=20 > LS368 - Att1_PLEN-517Rev3=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1309.pdf >=20 > LS368 - Att2_PLEN-540Rev1=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1310.pdf >=20 > LS368 - Att3_PLEN-543Rev1=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1311.pdf >=20 >=20 > = From ietf-ipr@ietf.org Mon Jan 9 08:41:55 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 899A411E8097; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 08:41:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.375 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.375 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.224, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iGKW+mAFjvNF; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 08:41:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 088B321F8552; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 08:41:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IETF Secretariat To: gregb@grotto-networking.com, diego.caviglia@marconi.com, rabbat@alum.mit.edu, hhelvoort@huawei.com, X-Test-IDTracker: no Message-ID: <20120109164151.1527.58263.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:41:51 -0800 Cc: ccamp@ietf.org, dbrungard@att.com, ipr-announce@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-14 X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:41:55 -0000 Dear Greg Bernstein, Diego Caviglia, Richard Rabbat, Huub van Helvoort: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS)= with Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)" (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls- vcat-lcas) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat on 2012-01-09 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1663/). The title of the IPR disclosure is "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-cc= amp- gmpls-vcat-lcas-14.""); The IETF Secretariat From ietf-ipr@ietf.org Mon Jan 9 08:42:26 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F3D111E809C; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 08:42:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.375 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.375 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.224, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cVaUY0FIBexZ; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 08:42:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94CCE21F84F7; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 08:42:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IETF Secretariat To: ylee@huawei.com, gregb@grotto-networking.com, danli@huawei.com, imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp, X-Test-IDTracker: no Message-ID: <20120109164221.1842.19032.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:42:21 -0800 Cc: ccamp@ietf.org, dbrungard@att.com, ipr-announce@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:42:26 -0000 Dear Young Lee, Greg Bernstein, Dan Li, Wataru Imajuku: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Routing a= nd Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks" (draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat= on 2012-01-09 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual Property R= ights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1662/). The title of the IPR disclosure is "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13.""); The IETF Secretariat From nurit.sprecher@nsn.com Mon Jan 9 09:20:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F8911E809B; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:20:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.097, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hLnwcX7-t59J; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:20:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B61311E809A; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:20:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q09HK3XF004485 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:20:03 +0100 Received: from demuexc024.nsn-intra.net (demuexc024.nsn-intra.net [10.159.32.11]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q09HJrxG026756; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:20:03 +0100 Received: from DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.128.25]) by demuexc024.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:20:02 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:19:57 +0100 Message-ID: <077E41CFFD002C4CAB7DFA4386A5326405178E68@DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status ofRecommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration andMaintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN)" Thread-Index: AczN3sDx/mJ/vGigQiGFDbfLLXEytgAKv9cAADpI3OA= References: From: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" To: "ext Scott Mansfield" , , , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2012 17:20:02.0328 (UTC) FILETIME=[EBF91980:01CCCEF2] Cc: andrew.g.malis@verizon.com, dbrungard@att.com Subject: Re: [CCAMP] New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status ofRecommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration andMaintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN)" X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 17:20:11 -0000 Support -----Original Message----- From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = ext Scott Mansfield Sent: =E0 08 =E9=F0=E5=E0=F8 2012 15:53 To: ietf@ietf.org; mpls@ietf.org; pwe3@ietf.org; ccamp@ietf.org Cc: swallow@cisco.com; stbryant@cisco.com; adrian@olddog.co.uk; = andrew.g.malis@verizon.com; dbrungard@att.com Subject: FW: New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status = ofRecommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration = andMaintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN)" This is a liaison from the ITU-T SG15 WP3 providing a copy of the = Determined recommendation G.8113.1 (May 2011). The liaison also = provides a pointer to the internet draft = draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point that requests an ACh code point that = is needed by G.8113.1. This is a liaison that will require a response = and the ITU-T has requested a response no later than 1 August 2012. I = would suggest that we use the liaison response to provide the outcome of = running the IETF process required to assign the requested code point. Regards, -scott. IETF-ITU Liaison Manager for MPLS > -----Original Message----- > From: Liaison Statement Management Tool [mailto:lsmt@ietf.org]=20 > Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 3:23 AM > To: chair@ietf.org > Cc: yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp;=20 > steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com; iesg@ietf.org;=20 > lear@cisco.com; Scott Mansfield; malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn;=20 > tsbsg15@itu.int; greg.jones@itu.int; hiroshi.ota@itu.int > Subject: New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status of=20 > Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations,=20 > Administration and Maintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in=20 > Packet Transport Network (PTN)" >=20 > Title: LS370 - Current status of Recommendation ITU-T=20 > G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration and Maintenance=20 > mechanism for MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN)=20 > Submission Date: 2012-01-08 URL of the IETF Web page: /liaison/1125/ >=20 > From: ITU-T SG 15 (Greg Jones ) > To: The IESG (chair@ietf.org) > Cc:=20 > yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp,steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com,ies > g@ietf.org,lear@cisco.com,Scott.Mansfield@Ericsson.com > Reponse Contact:=20 > tsbsg15@itu.int,greg.jones@itu.int,hiroshi.ota@itu.int > Technical Contact: malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn > Purpose: For information >=20 > Body: The December meeting of ITU-T Study Group 15 considered=20 > the approval of Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1,=20 > Operations, Administration and Maintenance mechanism for=20 > MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN). Unfortunately the=20 > Study Group could not approve this Recommendation so it was=20 > forwarded to the WTSA (20-29 November 2012) for approval. =20 > One of the issues that prevented the approval in SG 15 was=20 > the lack of an ACh code point to support this Recommendation.=20 > To resolve this issue SG 15 therefore requests the IETF to=20 > assign an ACh code point. An IETF draft=20 > draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point has been submitted to=20 > request this code point. > We have attached the text of the current draft of=20 > Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1 that has been=20 > forwarded to the WTSA for approval. > Attach: COM15R-22. >=20 > Attachment(s): >=20 > LS370 - pdf body=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1306.pdf >=20 > LS370 - pdf attachment=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1307.pdf >=20 >=20 >=20 _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf From nurit.sprecher@nsn.com Mon Jan 9 09:41:53 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D055311E80E6; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:41:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.507 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.092, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sgfjPvmaeHaC; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:41:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90B0811E80BD; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 09:41:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q09HfkoF014113 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:41:46 +0100 Received: from DEMUEXC048.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.32.94]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q09HfkhZ009479; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:41:46 +0100 Received: from DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.128.25]) by DEMUEXC048.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:41:46 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:41:43 +0100 Message-ID: <077E41CFFD002C4CAB7DFA4386A5326405178E7C@DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net> In-Reply-To: <077E41CFFD002C4CAB7DFA4386A5326405178E68@DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status ofRecommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration andMaintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in PacketTransport Network (PTN)" Thread-Index: AczN3sDx/mJ/vGigQiGFDbfLLXEytgAKv9cAADpI3OAAAL2zAA== References: <077E41CFFD002C4CAB7DFA4386A5326405178E68@DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net> From: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" To: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" , "ext Scott Mansfield" , , , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2012 17:41:46.0156 (UTC) FILETIME=[F51D76C0:01CCCEF5] Cc: andrew.g.malis@verizon.com, dbrungard@att.com Subject: Re: [CCAMP] New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status ofRecommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration andMaintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in PacketTransport Network (PTN)" X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 17:41:54 -0000 When saying support, I mean of course that I fully support the proposal = of Scott! -----Original Message----- From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) Sent: =E1 09 =E9=F0=E5=E0=F8 2012 19:20 To: ext Scott Mansfield; ietf@ietf.org; mpls@ietf.org; pwe3@ietf.org; = ccamp@ietf.org Cc: andrew.g.malis@verizon.com; dbrungard@att.com Subject: Re: [CCAMP] New Liaison Statement,"LS370 - Current status = ofRecommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1,Operations,Administration = andMaintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in PacketTransport Network (PTN)" Support -----Original Message----- From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = ext Scott Mansfield Sent: =E0 08 =E9=F0=E5=E0=F8 2012 15:53 To: ietf@ietf.org; mpls@ietf.org; pwe3@ietf.org; ccamp@ietf.org Cc: swallow@cisco.com; stbryant@cisco.com; adrian@olddog.co.uk; = andrew.g.malis@verizon.com; dbrungard@att.com Subject: FW: New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status = ofRecommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration = andMaintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN)" This is a liaison from the ITU-T SG15 WP3 providing a copy of the = Determined recommendation G.8113.1 (May 2011). The liaison also = provides a pointer to the internet draft = draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point that requests an ACh code point that = is needed by G.8113.1. This is a liaison that will require a response = and the ITU-T has requested a response no later than 1 August 2012. I = would suggest that we use the liaison response to provide the outcome of = running the IETF process required to assign the requested code point. Regards, -scott. IETF-ITU Liaison Manager for MPLS > -----Original Message----- > From: Liaison Statement Management Tool [mailto:lsmt@ietf.org]=20 > Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 3:23 AM > To: chair@ietf.org > Cc: yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp;=20 > steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com; iesg@ietf.org;=20 > lear@cisco.com; Scott Mansfield; malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn;=20 > tsbsg15@itu.int; greg.jones@itu.int; hiroshi.ota@itu.int > Subject: New Liaison Statement, "LS370 - Current status of=20 > Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations,=20 > Administration and Maintenance mechanism for MPLS-TP in=20 > Packet Transport Network (PTN)" >=20 > Title: LS370 - Current status of Recommendation ITU-T=20 > G.8113.1/Y.1372.1, Operations, Administration and Maintenance=20 > mechanism for MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN)=20 > Submission Date: 2012-01-08 URL of the IETF Web page: /liaison/1125/ >=20 > From: ITU-T SG 15 (Greg Jones ) > To: The IESG (chair@ietf.org) > Cc:=20 > yoichi.maeda@ttc.or.jp,steve.trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com,ies > g@ietf.org,lear@cisco.com,Scott.Mansfield@Ericsson.com > Reponse Contact:=20 > tsbsg15@itu.int,greg.jones@itu.int,hiroshi.ota@itu.int > Technical Contact: malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn > Purpose: For information >=20 > Body: The December meeting of ITU-T Study Group 15 considered=20 > the approval of Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1,=20 > Operations, Administration and Maintenance mechanism for=20 > MPLS-TP in Packet Transport Network (PTN). Unfortunately the=20 > Study Group could not approve this Recommendation so it was=20 > forwarded to the WTSA (20-29 November 2012) for approval. =20 > One of the issues that prevented the approval in SG 15 was=20 > the lack of an ACh code point to support this Recommendation.=20 > To resolve this issue SG 15 therefore requests the IETF to=20 > assign an ACh code point. An IETF draft=20 > draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point has been submitted to=20 > request this code point. > We have attached the text of the current draft of=20 > Recommendation ITU-T G.8113.1/Y.1372.1 that has been=20 > forwarded to the WTSA for approval. > Attach: COM15R-22. >=20 > Attachment(s): >=20 > LS370 - pdf body=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1306.pdf >=20 > LS370 - pdf attachment=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file1307.pdf >=20 >=20 >=20 _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ CCAMP mailing list CCAMP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp From leeyoung@huawei.com Tue Jan 10 07:18:20 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E33CA21F8619 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 07:18:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2VVsbvq9I7se for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 07:18:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73E3321F8569 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 07:18:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id ACF98058; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:18:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from DFWEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.203) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 07:16:14 -0800 Received: from DFWEML508-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.124.31.124]) by dfweml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.203]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 07:16:08 -0800 From: Leeyoung To: "ccamp@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-TE extensions Thread-Index: Acy5DZ+ZJdTeMl96QS+hqEFoaOoyuwArLYIwAAIG+9AAHa5MAAAQAp/wABCRQwAACNhCYAUTid3gAB9r62A= Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:16:07 +0000 Message-ID: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1718B45AE6@dfweml508-mbx.china.huawei.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.47.147.208] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1718B45AE6dfweml508mbxchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: [CCAMP] FW: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-TE extensions X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:18:21 -0000 --_000_7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1718B45AE6dfweml508mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi CCAMP WG, We are finishing up both generic encoding (draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constra= int-encode) and WSON encoding. One of the pending issues is if we need to advertise different priorities l= evels for available labels and shared backup labels (to be able to preempt = lower priority LSP when high priority LSP is setup). This requirement was r= aised by Rajan. The authors feel this is a legitimate requirement and propo= sed the following encoding changes to the current available Labels sub-TLV = (section 1.1) and shared backup labels sub-TLV (section 1.2). Please let us= know if you object to this. Otherwise, we will add this encoding in the up= coming revision. Please also provide your comment to this encoding proposal= if you have any questions. Thanks. Young & Greg -----suggested encoding----------------------------------------------------= ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------------------ 1.1. Available Labels Sub-TLV To indicate the labels available for use on a link the Available Labels sub= -TLV consists of a single variable length label set field as follows: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |A| Reserved | Priority Flags| Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Label Set Field | : : +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Where A (Availability bit) =3D 1 or 0 indicates that the labels listed in the fol= lowing label set field are available or not available, respectively, for us= e at a given priority level as indicated by the Priority Flags. Priority Flags: Bit 8 corresponds to priority level 0 and bit 15 correspond= s to priority level 7. If a bit is set then the labels in the label set fie= ld are available or not available as indicated by the A bit for use at that= particular priority level. Note that Label Set Field is defined in Section 3.2. 1.2. Shared Backup Labels Sub-TLV To indicate the labels available for shared backup use on a link the Shared= Backup Labels sub-TLV consists of a single variable length label set field= as follows: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |A| Reserved | Priority Flags| Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Label Set Field | : : +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Where A (Availability bit) =3D 1 or 0 indicates that the labels listed in the fol= lowing label set field are available or not available, respectively, for us= e at a given priority level as indicated by the Priority Flags. Priority Flags: Bit 8 corresponds to priority level 0 and bit 15 correspond= s to priority level 7. If a bit is set then the labels in the label set fie= ld are available or not available as indicated by the A bit for use at that= particular priority level. From: Rajan Rao [mailto:rrao@infinera.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 1:56 PM To: Greg Bernstein Cc: Leeyoung; draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org; dr= aft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org; Lou Berger= (lberger@labn.net); BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; Biao Lu Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-TE extension= s Greg, Want to go back to issue #1 one more time. If LSP pre-emption is a requi= rement (which I think it should be), then we do not have sufficient informa= tion in BW advertisement to compute path for a higher priority LSP. The = unreserved BW @ 8 priorities plus Available Labels don't provide enough in= formation to perform RWA. On #2, are you saying that it is sufficient to imply SC =3D LSC without= explicitly having a field for SC in Available Labels sub-TLV? Thanks Rajan From: Greg Bernstein [mailto:gregb@grotto-networking.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 7:53 AM To: Rajan Rao Cc: Leeyoung; draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org; dr= aft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org; Lou Berger= (lberger@labn.net); BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; Biao Lu Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-TE extension= s Hi Rajan, see below. Greg On 12/13/2011 5:43 PM, Rajan Rao wrote: Greg, Sure, using unreserved BW we can address #1. I assume the value carri= ed in unreserved BW is still in Bytes/sec (& not lambda count). This po= int was not clear to me from the drafts. --> We are not modifying earlier GMPLS RFCs such as RFC4202 and RFC4203. Al= though, I was a co-author of these, but disagree with some of the choices m= ade. There are aspects of these documents that don't make much sense for TD= M or optical networks. My point #2 is more related to MRN case. If one were to use IACD as in RF= C6001, what is the SC & encoding to use as BW advertisement is not telling= me this? --> The switching capability would be "lambda switch capable" per RFC4202, = 4203. We don't change any of this for WSONs. Thanks Rajan From: Greg Bernstein [mailto:gregb@grotto-networking.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 4:20 PM To: Rajan Rao Cc: Leeyoung; draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-= ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org; Lou Berger (lberger@= labn.net); BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; Biao Lu Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-TE extension= s Hi Rajan, in RFC4202 section 2.4.4 states: "The additional information incl= udes Reservable Bandwidth per priority, which specifies the bandwidth of an= LSP that could be supported by the interface at a given priority number." Section "3.10. Interface on a OXC with Internal DWDM That Is Transparent to= Bit-Rate and Framing" then gives an example of how to encode this informat= ion: "The following is an example of an interface switching capability descriptor on an OXC with internal DWDM that is transparent to bit- rate and framing: Interface Switching Capability Descriptor: Interface Switching Capability =3D LSC Encoding =3D Lambda (photonic) Max LSP Bandwidth =3D Determined by optical technology limits" Hence I don't think there is a conflict with RFC4202 or RFC4203. RFC3630 s= ection 2.5.8 defines the "Unreserved Bandwidth" sub-TLV for MPLS-TE which y= ou can use. There was no requests for the feature of priority designation i= n the available labels or shared backup labels (section 7.1 of http://tools= .ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13). Is there some specific functionality you're looking for? Greg On 12/13/2011 11:59 AM, Rajan Rao wrote: Young & Greg, Please see response below. Thanks Rajan From: Leeyoung [mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 9:18 AM To: Rajan Rao; draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf= -ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org Cc: Lou Berger (lberger@labn.net); BRUNGARD, DEBOR= AH A; Biao Lu Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-TE extension= s Hi Rajan, Here's our response to your questions. Please see-in line. Thanks. Young& Greg From: Rajan Rao [mailto:rrao@infinera.com] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 2:36 PM To: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpl= s-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org Cc: Lou Berger (lberger@labn.net); BRUNGARD, DEBOR= AH A; Biao Lu Subject: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-TE extensions Hi Authors, Wanted to follow up on the comment I made during IETF meeting in Taipei. = This refers to gaps in current WSON WG docs. I see following capabilities= not addressed in the drafts: 1) Different Priorities levels for available labels: current drafts = do not provide a way to advertise Available labels at different priorities.= Not sure if this was left out intentionally. YOUNG/Greg>> We are not sure if there is a clear requirement to assign diff= erent priorities (wavelength preference) levels to labels in WSON via routi= ng. There are mechanisms already for specifying prefered labels in GMPLS si= gnaling. In addition there are capabilities proposed in the WSON signaling= draft that can serve this function more specifically for WSONs. Note that= this is a different concept from restoration or traffic priority for an LS= P which is generally supported under GMPLS/MPLS. [Rajan] As far as requirement goes, I would refer to RFC 4202 (section 2.= 4.4). The issue I see in the current BW adv model is the following: (a) Since Labels (BW) advertised don't have priorities associated, one = can't set up prioritized Lambda-LSPs. (b) If I want high priority lambda-LSP(s) to pre-empt a low priority lam= bda-LSP(s), I don't have a way to do it with the current scheme. This me= ans I can't have restoration support for HighPriority LSPs unless I reserve= some waves without use. The current BW adv model is kind of flat & prevents above functionalities = which I think are important in transport networks. 2) Switching capability: current drafts do not provide a way to iden= tify switching cap as it is non ISCD based. Going forward we will need S= C info as there is going to be FlexGrid capable links possible on the same = node. It is also possible that same link may support both fixed/flexible t= ypes of switching. Any reason why we can't use ISCD here? YOUNG/Greg>> We believe that Flex grid should be addressed separately. Firs= t it is not CCAMP item yet and more importantly, it is beyond the scope of = the current WSON. WSON only deals with "fixed" grid per se. It is not a goo= d practice to convolute the existing scope with potential future capabiliti= es such as flex grid. As Taipei meeting discussed this issue a bit, it will= take a while for data plane work in ITU-T to settle in and it will take mu= ch efforts to identify first the overarching requirements first before gett= ing into solutions. [Rajan] Agree on addressing FlexGrid separately. We are following RFC 4202 definition of Switching Cap for PSC, TDM & OTN. = Wonder why are not using LSC already defined in the RFC? In addition, the IACD approach defined in RFC 6001 for MLN/MRN is base= d on multiple switching Cap info. How can we address MLN/MRN without SC in= fo? Will be happy to join and contribute to the draft. Please let me know. Thanks Rajan -- =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237 -- =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237 --_000_7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1718B45AE6dfweml508mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi CCAMP WG,

We are finishing up both generic encoding (draft-ietf-ccamp-ge= neral-constraint-encode) and WSON encoding.

One of the pending issues is if we need to advertise different= priorities levels for available labels and shared backup labels (to be abl= e to preempt lower priority LSP when high priority LSP is setup). This requirement was raised by Rajan. The authors feel this is = a legitimate requirement and proposed the following encoding changes to the= current available Labels sub-TLV (section 1.1) and shared backup labels su= b-TLV (section 1.2). Please let us know if you object to this. Otherwise, we will add this encoding in the= upcoming revision. Please also provide your comment to this encoding propo= sal if you have any questions.

Thanks.

Young & Greg

-----suggested encoding-----------------------------------= ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= -----------------------------------

1.1. Available Labels Sub-TLV

To indicate the labels available for use on a link t= he Available Labels sub-TLV consists of a single variable length label set = field as follows:

0 &n= bsp; 1&nb= sp; = 2 &= nbsp; 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9= 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+= -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-&#= 43;-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+=

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= 3;-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= 3;

| &n= bsp; = ; Label Set Field &nb= sp; = ; |

: &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; :

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= 3;-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= 3;

Where

A (Availability bit) =3D 1 or 0 indicates that the labels listed in the = following label set field are available or not available, respectively, for= use at a given priority level as indicated by the Priority Flags.

Priority Flags: Bit 8 corresponds to priority level 0 and bit 15 corresp= onds to priority level 7. If a bit is set then the labels in the label set = field are available or not available as indicated by the A bit for use at that particular priority level.

Note that Label Set Field is defined in Section 3.2.=

1.2. Shared Backup Labels Sub-TLV

To indicate the labels available for shared backup u= se on a link the Shared Backup Labels sub-TLV consists of a single variable= length label set field as follows:

0 &n= bsp; 1&nb= sp; = 2 &= nbsp; 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9= 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+= -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-&#= 43;-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+=

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= 3;-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= 3;

| &n= bsp; Labe= l Set Field &nb= sp; = ; |

: &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; :

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= 3;-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-= 3;

Where

From: Rajan Rao [mailto:rrao@infinera.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 1:56 PM
To: Greg Bernstein
Cc: Leeyoung; draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.= org; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org; Lou= Berger (lberger@labn.net); BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; Biao Lu
Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-T= E extensions

Greg,

Want to go back to iss= ue #1 one more time. If LSP pre-emption is a requirement = (which I think it should be), then we do not have sufficient information in BW advertisement to compute pa= th for a higher priority LSP. The unreserved BW @ 8 prior= ities plus Available Labels don’t provide enough information to= perform RWA.

On #2, are you s= aying that it is sufficient to imply SC =3D LSC without e= xplicitly having a field for SC in Available Labels sub-TLV?

Thanks

Rajan

From: Greg Bernstein [mailto:gregb@grotto-networking.co= m]
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 7:53 AM
To: Rajan Rao
Cc: Leeyoung; draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.= org; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org; Lou= Berger (lberger@labn.net); BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; Biao Lu
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-T= E extensions

Hi Rajan, see below.
Greg
On 12/13/2011 5:43 PM, Rajan Rao wrote:

Greg,

Sure, using unre= served BW we can address #1. I assume the val= ue carried in unreserved BW is still in Bytes/sec (& not lambda c= ount). This point was not clear to me from the drafts.

-->= ; We are not modifying earlier GMPLS RFCs such as RFC4202 and RFC4203. Alth= ough, I was a co-author of these, but disagree with some of the choices made. There are aspects of these documents that don't make much se= nse for TDM or optical networks.

My point #2 is more re= lated to MRN case. If one were to use IACD as in RFC6001, = what is the SC & encoding to use as BW advertisement is not telling me= this?

-->= ; The switching capability would be "lambda switch capable" per R= FC4202, 4203. We don't change any of this for WSONs.

Thanks

Rajan

From: Greg Bernstein [mailto:gregb@grotto-networking.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 4:20 PM
To: Rajan Rao
Cc: Leeyoung; draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org; Lou = Berger (lberger@labn.net); BRUNGARD= , DEBORAH A; Biao Lu
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-T= E extensions

Hi Rajan, in RFC4202 section 2.4.4 states: "The= additional information includes Reservable Bandwidth per priority, which s= pecifies the bandwidth of an LSP that could be supported by the interface a= t a given priority number."
Section "3.10. Interface on a OXC with Internal DWDM That Is Transpare= nt to Bit-Rate and Framing" then gives an example of how to encode thi= s information:
"The following is an example of an interface switching capability
   descriptor on an OXC with internal DWDM that is transparent to= bit-
   rate and framing:

      Interface Switching Capability Descriptor:          Interface Switching Capabi= lity =3D LSC
         Encoding =3D Lambda (photo= nic)
         Max LSP Bandwidth =3D Dete= rmined by optical technology limits"

Hence I don't think there is a conflict with RFC4202 or RFC4203. RFC3= 630 section 2.5.8 defines the "Unreserved Bandwidth" sub-TLV for = MPLS-TE which you can use. There was no requests for the feature of priorit= y designation in the available labels or shared backup labels (section 7.1 of http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13).

Is there some specific functionality you're looking for?

Greg
On 12/13/2011 11:59 AM, Rajan Rao wrote:

Young & Greg,

Please see response be= low.

Thanks

Rajan

From: Leeyoung= [mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 9:18 AM
To: Rajan Rao; draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org
Cc: Lou Berger (lberger@labn.net= ); BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; Biao Lu
Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-T= E extensions

Hi Rajan,<= /o:p>

Here’s our respo= nse to your questions. Please see-in line. Thanks.

Young& Greg=

From: Rajan Ra= o [mailto:rrao@infinera.com]
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 2:36 PM
To: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te@tools.ietf.org
Cc: Lou Berger (lberger@labn.net= ); BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; Biao Lu
Subject: draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode & OSPF-TE ex= tensions

Hi Authors,

Wanted to follow up on the comment I made during IET= F meeting in Taipei. This refers to gaps in current WSON WG doc= s. I see following capabilities not addressed in the drafts:

1) Different Priorities levels for available labels:&n= bsp; current drafts do not provide a way to advertise Available label= s at different priorities. Not sure if this was left out intentionall= y.

YOUNG/Greg>> We = are not sure if there is a clear requirement to assign different priorities= (wavelength preference) levels to labels in WSON via routing. There are me= chanisms already for specifying prefered labels in GMPLS signaling. In addition there are capabilities proposed in t= he WSON signaling draft that can serve this function more specifically for = WSONs. Note that this is a different concept from restoration or traf= fic priority for an LSP which is generally supported under GMPLS/MPLS.

[Rajan] As far a= s requirement goes, I would refer to RFC 4202 (section 2.4.4).=

The issue I see in the= current BW adv model is the following:

(a) Since Labels (BW) adv= ertised don’t have priorities associated, one can’t = ;set up prioritized Lambda-LSPs.

(b) If I want high priori= ty lambda-LSP(s) to pre-empt a low priority lambda-LSP(s), I do= n’t have a way to do it with the current scheme. This mea= ns I can’t have restoration support for HighPriority LSPs unless I reserve some waves without use.

The current BW adv mod= el is kind of flat & prevents above functionalities which I think= are important in transport networks.

2) Switching capability: current drafts do= not provide a way to identify switching cap as it is non ISCD based. = Going forward we will need SC info as there is going to be Fle= xGrid capable links possible on the same node. It is also possible that same link may support both fixed/flexible types of switching= .

Any reason why we canR= 17;t use ISCD here?

YOUNG/Greg>> We = believe that Flex grid should be addressed separately. First it is not CCAM= P item yet and more importantly, it is beyond the scope of the current WSON= . WSON only deals with “fixed” grid per se. It is not a good practice to convolute the existing scope with potential f= uture capabilities such as flex grid. As Taipei meeting discussed this issu= e a bit, it will take a while for data plane work in ITU-T to settle in and= it will take much efforts to identify first the overarching requirements first before getting into solutions.

[Rajan] Agree on= addressing FlexGrid separately.

We are following = RFC 4202 definition of Switching Cap for PSC, TDM & OTN. &n= bsp; Wonder why are not using LSC already defined in the = RFC?

In addition, &nb= sp;the IACD approach defined in RFC 6001 for MLN/MRN is b= ased on multiple switching Cap info. How can we address MLN/MRN witho= ut SC info?

Will be happy to join and contribute to the draft.&n= bsp; Please let me know.

Thanks

Rajan

--

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D

Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237

--

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D

Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237

--_000_7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1718B45AE6dfweml508mbxchi_-- From adrian@olddog.co.uk Tue Jan 10 14:06:55 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8E2F21F8602; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 14:06:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.797 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.797 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.803, BAYES_00=-2.599, DEAR_SOMETHING=1.605] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8Ii4IvfturJr; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 14:06:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB0F621F85F8; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 14:06:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0AM6nLN010582; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:06:50 GMT Received: from 950129200 (adsl-84-227-210-28.adslplus.ch [84.227.210.28]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0AM6mXn010567 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:06:49 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:06:48 -0000 Message-ID: <045301cccfe4$26cffdc0$746ff940$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AczP5CBIxZMpaB2dSP68AYlr4xpwlw== Content-Language: en-gb Cc: yzhaous@huawei.com, ccamp@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [CCAMP] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-14 X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:06:55 -0000 Dear Sir, Thank you for your IPR disclosure https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1663/ Please note that draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas was published as RFC 6344 in August 2011 and, indeed, revision 14 of the draft was never posted. Was your intention to file the IPR disclosure against RFC 6344? Could you please look into this and update the disclosure as appropriate. I note that the patent application was filed on 9 Oct 2005. And the associated Internet-Draft (which has a Huawei employee and a Huawei consultant as co-authors) was first published as an IETF Working Group draft on 8 September 2006. As I noted above, RFC 6344 was published in August 2011, yet the IPR disclosure has only just been made. May I draw your attention to RFC 3979 which calls for timely IPR disclosure as a requirement for participation in the IETF. Can I ask you to urgently investigate how you can avoid such late disclosures on behalf of Huawei Technologies in the future. Many thanks, Adrian Farrel Routing Area Director, IETF > -----Original Message----- > From: IETF Secretariat [mailto:ietf-ipr@ietf.org] > Sent: 09 January 2012 16:42 > To: gregb@grotto-networking.com; diego.caviglia@marconi.com; > rabbat@alum.mit.edu; hhelvoort@huawei.com > Cc: stbryant@cisco.com; adrian@olddog.co.uk; ccamp@ietf.org; > lberger@labn.net; dbrungard@att.com; ipr-announce@ietf.org > Subject: IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR > related to draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-14 > > Dear Greg Bernstein, Diego Caviglia, Richard Rabbat, Huub van Helvoort: > > An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Operating > Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme > (LCAS) with Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)" > (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat > on 2012-01-09 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual > Property Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1663/). > The title of the IPR disclosure is > "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf- > ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-14.""); > > The IETF Secretariat From lberger@labn.net Wed Jan 11 10:57:59 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8395711E8099 for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 10:57:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -97.474 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.687, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CFG8SvG3bVAk for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 10:57:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from oproxy3-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy3.bluehost.com [IPv6:2605:dc00:100:2::a3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CA2FD11E807A for ; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 10:57:58 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 5601 invoked by uid 0); 11 Jan 2012 18:57:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by oproxy3.bluehost.com with SMTP; 11 Jan 2012 18:57:58 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=C57Q8RgZahP79Ux7pd+0Sk/1Dvc7EmvSb9aWShIdc9U=; b=D8QnqphLNhSrYwM2SHJwpEEcahvIukV0ml/bmTyGLZ4lfuKgJYgRskNpnmeGuTtvrSm15Hg29qu/CfAlGqBDFHwjzhzuPV8h0NCqT+5udwRwUFiyFis826XplR8aEUmz; Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Rl3Mz-0007eB-Pl; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 11:57:57 -0700 Message-ID: <4F0DDBB4.20100@labn.net> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 13:57:56 -0500 From: Lou Berger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ylee@huawei.com, gregb@grotto-networking.com References: <20120109164221.1842.19032.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20120109164221.1842.19032.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net} Cc: danli@huawei.com, IETF Secretariat , imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp, ccamp@ietf.org, dbrungard@att.com Subject: Re: [CCAMP] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:57:59 -0000 Young, Greg, Can you comment on the timing of this IPR disclosure and how it relates to the "timely IPR disclosure" requirements RFC 3979, notably Section 6.2.1? For context of others, the IPR covered in the disclosure are two patent applications listing Young and Greg and filed in June and July of 2008. Much thanks, Lou and Deborah On 1/9/2012 11:42 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote: > > Dear Young Lee, Greg Bernstein, Dan Li, Wataru Imajuku: > > An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Routing and > Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Switched Optical > Networks" (draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat on > 2012-01-09 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual Property Rights > Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1662/). The title of the IPR > disclosure is "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to > draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13.""); > > The IETF Secretariat > From tnadeau@lucidvision.com Wed Jan 11 12:19:09 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B9511E80AB; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:19:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.565 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.565 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7cts+KM2l9cS; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:19:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [72.71.250.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F2E111E808C; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:19:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.100.68.114] (unknown [141.202.11.155]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9D320483F3; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 15:19:02 -0500 (EST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Thomas Nadeau In-Reply-To: <4F0DDBB4.20100@labn.net> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 15:19:01 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4C0A72FB-4B09-494E-9368-17297145ACB9@lucidvision.com> References: <20120109164221.1842.19032.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F0DDBB4.20100@labn.net> To: Lou Berger X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Cc: danli@huawei.com, IETF Secretariat , imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp, ccamp@ietf.org, dbrungard@att.com Subject: Re: [CCAMP] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:19:09 -0000 CCAMP co-chairs, This IPR claim is clearly a violation of the IETF's IPR = policies and process.=20 I request that the work on the draft be restarted avoiding the IPR = entanglement that is likely to ensue with the current work. --Tom On Jan 11, 2012, at 1:57 PM, Lou Berger wrote: > Young, Greg, > Can you comment on the timing of this IPR disclosure and how it = relates > to the "timely IPR disclosure" requirements RFC 3979, notably Section = 6.2.1? >=20 > For context of others, the IPR covered in the disclosure are two = patent > applications listing Young and Greg and filed in June and July of = 2008. >=20 > Much thanks, > Lou and Deborah >=20 > On 1/9/2012 11:42 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote: >>=20 >> Dear Young Lee, Greg Bernstein, Dan Li, Wataru Imajuku: >>=20 >> An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled = "Routing and >> Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Switched = Optical >> Networks" (draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info) was submitted to the IETF = Secretariat on >> 2012-01-09 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual = Property Rights >> Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1662/). The title of = the IPR >> disclosure is "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR = related to >> draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13.""); >>=20 >> The IETF Secretariat >>=20 > _______________________________________________ > CCAMP mailing list > CCAMP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp >=20 From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Jan 11 14:42:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AADD11E80C2; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:42:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.565 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.565 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 96F58xK7hMQS; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:42:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964D811E8074; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:42:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.64p1 Message-ID: <20120111224238.31134.78793.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:42:38 -0800 Cc: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-oam-configuration-fwk-07.txt X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 22:42:39 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane = Working Group of the IETF. Title : GMPLS RSVP-TE extensions for OAM Configuration Author(s) : Attila Takacs Don Fedyk Jia He Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-oam-configuration-fwk-07.txt Pages : 24 Date : 2012-01-11 OAM is an integral part of transport connections, hence it is required that OAM functions are activated/deactivated in sync with connection commissioning/decommissioning; avoiding spurious alarms and ensuring consistent operation. In certain technologies OAM entities are inherently established once the connection is set up, while other technologies require extra configuration to establish and configure OAM entities. This document specifies extensions to RSVP-TE to support the establishment and configuration of OAM entities along with LSP signaling. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-oam-configuration-fwk-= 07.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-oam-configuration-fwk-0= 7.txt From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Jan 11 14:42:46 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77AFD11E80CE; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:42:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.565 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.565 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fl3ns5hUVMY9; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:42:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02E2811E80C2; Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:42:46 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.64p1 Message-ID: <20120111224246.30908.77833.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:42:46 -0800 Cc: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-eth-oam-ext-07.txt X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 22:42:46 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane = Working Group of the IETF. Title : GMPLS RSVP-TE Extensions for Ethernet OAM Configuration Author(s) : Attila Takacs Balazs Gero Hao Long Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-eth-oam-ext-07.txt Pages : 20 Date : 2012-01-11 The GMPLS controlled Ethernet Label Switching (GELS) work extended GMPLS RSVP-TE to support the establishment of Ethernet LSPs. IEEE Ethernet Connectivity Fault Management (CFM) specifies an adjunct OAM flow to check connectivity in Ethernet networks. CFM can be also used with Ethernet LSPs for fault detection and triggering recovery mechanisms. The ITU-T Y.1731 specification builds on CFM and specifies additional OAM mechanisms, including Performance Monitoring, for Ethernet networks. This document specifies extensions of GMPLS RSVP-TE to support the setup of the associated Ethernet OAM (CFM and Y.1731) entities defining Ethernet technology specific TLV based on [OAM-CONF-FWK]. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-eth-oam-ext-07= .txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-eth-oam-ext-07.= txt From leeyoung@huawei.com Thu Jan 12 08:07:44 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2B4021F860B; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:07:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rn+V3nNPjava; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:07:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BF7221F85F3; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:07:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id ACH54170; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:07:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from DFWEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:05:45 -0800 Received: from DFWEML508-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.124.31.124]) by dfweml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.151]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:05:27 -0800 From: Leeyoung To: Lou Berger , "gregb@grotto-networking.com" Thread-Topic: IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 Thread-Index: AQHM0JL2QwaqMttFikeApCdPF8XARJYI5Arg Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:05:27 +0000 Message-ID: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1718B4645C@dfweml508-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <20120109164221.1842.19032.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F0DDBB4.20100@labn.net> In-Reply-To: <4F0DDBB4.20100@labn.net> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.47.135.68] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "ccamp@ietf.org" , IETF Secretariat , "imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "dbrungard@att.com" Subject: Re: [CCAMP] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:07:44 -0000 SGkgTG91IGFuZCBEZWJvcmFoLg0KDQpTb3JyeSBhYm91dCB0aGlzIGlzc3VlLiBJIHdhcyBjb25m dXNlZCBhYm91dCB0aGUgcHJvY2Vzc2luZyBvZiBJUFIgZGlzY2xvc3VyZXMgYW5kIHRoZSB0aW1l bGluZXMgb2YgaW5kaXZpZHVhbCBkaXNjbG9zdXJlcyB3aXRoaW4gSUVURi4NClRoaXMgaGFzIGJl ZW4gYSBiZW5lZmljaWFsIGV4Y2hhbmdlIGFzIEkgaGF2ZSBub3cgZ290dGVuIGZ1cnRoZXIgY2xh cmlmaWNhdGlvbiBvbiB0aGUgcHJvY2Vzcy4NCg0KTW92aW5nIGZvcndhcmQgSSBob3BlIHRvIGJl IDEwMCUgaW4gYWxpZ25tZW50IHdpdGggSUVURiBwb2xpY3kuIA0KDQpJIGFwb2xvZ2l6ZSBmb3Ig bXkgY29uZnVzaW9uLiANCg0KWW91bmcgDQoNCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQpG cm9tOiBMb3UgQmVyZ2VyIFttYWlsdG86bGJlcmdlckBsYWJuLm5ldF0gDQpTZW50OiBXZWRuZXNk YXksIEphbnVhcnkgMTEsIDIwMTIgMTI6NTggUE0NClRvOiBMZWV5b3VuZzsgZ3JlZ2JAZ3JvdHRv LW5ldHdvcmtpbmcuY29tDQpDYzogSUVURiBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdDsgSHVhd2VpIGRhbmxpOyBpbWFq dWt1LndhdGFydUBsYWIubnR0LmNvLmpwOyBzdGJyeWFudEBjaXNjby5jb207IGFkcmlhbkBvbGRk b2cuY28udWs7IGNjYW1wQGlldGYub3JnOyBkYnJ1bmdhcmRAYXR0LmNvbQ0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6 IElQUiBEaXNjbG9zdXJlOiBIdWF3ZWkgVGVjaG5vbG9naWVzIENvLiwgTHRkJ3MgU3RhdGVtZW50 IGFib3V0IElQUiByZWxhdGVkIHRvIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtcndhLWluZm8tMTMNCg0KWW91 bmcsIEdyZWcsDQoJQ2FuIHlvdSBjb21tZW50IG9uIHRoZSB0aW1pbmcgb2YgdGhpcyBJUFIgZGlz Y2xvc3VyZSBhbmQgaG93IGl0IHJlbGF0ZXMNCnRvIHRoZSAidGltZWx5IElQUiBkaXNjbG9zdXJl IiByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgUkZDIDM5NzksIG5vdGFibHkgU2VjdGlvbiA2LjIuMT8NCg0KRm9yIGNv bnRleHQgb2Ygb3RoZXJzLCB0aGUgSVBSIGNvdmVyZWQgaW4gdGhlIGRpc2Nsb3N1cmUgYXJlIHR3 byBwYXRlbnQNCmFwcGxpY2F0aW9ucyBsaXN0aW5nIFlvdW5nIGFuZCBHcmVnIGFuZCBmaWxlZCBp biBKdW5lIGFuZCBKdWx5IG9mIDIwMDguDQoNCk11Y2ggdGhhbmtzLA0KTG91IGFuZCBEZWJvcmFo DQoNCk9uIDEvOS8yMDEyIDExOjQyIEFNLCBJRVRGIFNlY3JldGFyaWF0IHdyb3RlOg0KPiANCj4g RGVhciBZb3VuZyBMZWUsIEdyZWcgQmVybnN0ZWluLCBEYW4gTGksIFdhdGFydSBJbWFqdWt1Og0K PiANCj4gIEFuIElQUiBkaXNjbG9zdXJlIHRoYXQgcGVydGFpbnMgdG8geW91ciBJbnRlcm5ldC1E cmFmdCBlbnRpdGxlZCAiUm91dGluZyBhbmQNCj4gV2F2ZWxlbmd0aCBBc3NpZ25tZW50IEluZm9y bWF0aW9uIE1vZGVsIGZvciBXYXZlbGVuZ3RoIFN3aXRjaGVkIE9wdGljYWwNCj4gTmV0d29ya3Mi IChkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWNjYW1wLXJ3YS1pbmZvKSB3YXMgc3VibWl0dGVkIHRvIHRoZSBJRVRGIFNl Y3JldGFyaWF0IG9uDQo+IDIwMTItMDEtMDkgYW5kIGhhcyBiZWVuIHBvc3RlZCBvbiB0aGUgIklF VEYgUGFnZSBvZiBJbnRlbGxlY3R1YWwgUHJvcGVydHkgUmlnaHRzDQo+IERpc2Nsb3N1cmVzIiAo aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9pcHIvMTY2Mi8pLiBUaGUgdGl0bGUgb2YgdGhl IElQUg0KPiBkaXNjbG9zdXJlIGlzICJIdWF3ZWkgVGVjaG5vbG9naWVzIENvLixMdGQncyBTdGF0 ZW1lbnQgYWJvdXQgSVBSIHJlbGF0ZWQgdG8NCj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1jY2FtcC1yd2EtaW5mby0x My4iIik7DQo+IA0KPiBUaGUgSUVURiBTZWNyZXRhcmlhdA0KPiANCg== From internet-drafts@ietf.org Thu Jan 12 22:18:34 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11CB321F8607; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:18:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.566 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LFjEooa71xD8; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:18:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9500021F85FC; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:18:33 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.64p1 Message-ID: <20120113061833.11222.83028.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:18:33 -0800 Cc: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-10.txt X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 06:18:34 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane = Working Group of the IETF. Title : Traffic Engineering Database Management Information Base= in support of MPLS-TE/GMPLS Author(s) : Masanori Miyazawa Tomohiro Otani Kenji Kumaki Thomas D. Nadeau Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-10.txt Pages : 32 Date : 2012-01-11 This memo defines the Management Information Base (MIB) objects in order to manage traffic engineering database (TED) information with extension in support of Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) with traffic engineering (TE) as well as Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) for use with network management protocols. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-10.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-10.txt From lberger@labn.net Tue Jan 17 08:13:23 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2EEE21F8570 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:13:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -97.772 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.772 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.389, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KHDCpMYQvGGD for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:13:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from oproxy5-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy5.bluehost.com [IPv6:2605:dc00:100:2::a5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 44E2521F8543 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:13:22 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 29450 invoked by uid 0); 17 Jan 2012 16:13:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by cpoproxy2.bluehost.com with SMTP; 17 Jan 2012 16:13:21 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=Aah/gXQTXnUsMwnylIuX9X1SC59escilRPEmsPT5irY=; b=QyalkhjxpuOzZ3xzP9EZ0tMdj7IZxe+xFxgcl04htzke4fmm9hp8MeTHhv0xZ7F2+NCBltS+JloUGaGA/qJjGGWsAfziofsxnfm7XCf0lK6Y0XR/dEAyzD7WW9QRQPfN; Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RnBez-0003rO-1Z; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 09:13:21 -0700 Message-ID: <4F159E25.4030401@labn.net> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:13:25 -0500 From: Lou Berger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Farrel X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net} Cc: CCAMP , IESG Subject: [CCAMP] Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:13:23 -0000 Adrian, (IESG members,) The CCAMP WG received the enclosed IPR statement on January 9, 2012. It refers to a draft and patent applications that have shared authorship. The patent applications were filed in June and July of 2008. draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-00 was published August 29, 2008, and was based on draft-bernstein-ccamp-wson-info which was first published October 30, 2007. Given Sections 6.2.1 and 7 of RFC 3979, as well as the IESG page on Intellectual Property (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/IntellectualProperty), we would like to ask for your guidance on the handling of the identified draft, as well as related drafts with the same authors, within the working group. We, the CCAMP chairs, believe that the working group's handling of / response to this should be consistent with, and in the context of, an IETF-wide approach to such matters. Here are some relevant links from the ccamp archive: A message sent to the WG on this disclosure and resulting responses: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg13034.html Publication of draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-00: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg00453.html Poll on accepting individual draft as WG document: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg00417.html & http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg00355.html Individual publication of draft-bernstein-ccamp-wson-info-00: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg09597.html Thank you, Lou and Deborah CCAMP WG Chairs -------- Original Message -------- Subject: IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:42:21 -0800 From: IETF Secretariat To: ylee@huawei.com, gregb@grotto-networking.com, danli@huawei.com, imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp, CC: stbryant@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk, ccamp@ietf.org, lberger@labn.net, dbrungard@att.com, ipr-announce@ietf.org Dear Young Lee, Greg Bernstein, Dan Li, Wataru Imajuku: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks" (draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat on 2012-01-09 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1662/). The title of the IPR disclosure is "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13.""); The IETF Secretariat From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Jan 18 07:29:48 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29A5F21F87CC; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:29:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.58 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.019, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SDw+N-4NtbVx; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:29:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C2EF21F874A; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:29:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.64p1 Message-ID: <20120118152947.17076.33966.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:29:47 -0800 Cc: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-03.txt X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:29:48 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane = Working Group of the IETF. Title : Information model for G.709 Optical Transport Networks (= OTN) Author(s) : Sergio Belotti Pietro Vittorio Grandi Daniele Ceccarelli Diego Caviglia Fatai Zhang Dan Li Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-03.txt Pages : 24 Date : 2012-01-18 The recent revision of ITU-T recommendation G.709 [G.709-v3] has introduced new fixed and flexible ODU containers in Optical Transport Networks (OTNs), enabling optimized support for an increasingly abundant service mix. This document provides a model of information needed by the routing and signaling process in OTNs to support Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) control of all currently defined ODU containers. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-03= .txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-03.= txt From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Jan 18 07:35:54 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5834121F87E6; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:35:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.58 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.019, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jbzy9LE9ayso; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:35:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D671021F87D5; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:35:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.64p1 Message-ID: <20120118153553.19518.35167.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:35:53 -0800 Cc: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-01.txt X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:35:54 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane = Working Group of the IETF. Title : Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF for Generalized M= PLS (GMPLS) Control of Evolving G.709 OTN Networks Author(s) : Daniele Ceccarelli Diego Caviglia Fatai Zhang Dan Li Sergio Belotti Pietro Vittorio Grandi Rajan Rao Khuzema Pithewan John E Drake Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-01.txt Pages : 31 Date : 2012-01-18 The recent revision of ITU-T Recommendation G.709 [G709-V3] has introduced new fixed and flexible ODU containers, enabling optimized support for an increasingly abundant service mix. This document describes OSPF routing protocol extensions to support Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) control of all currently defined ODU containers, in support of both sub-lambda and lambda level routing granularity. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-01.t= xt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-01.txt From daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com Wed Jan 18 07:44:37 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5370C21F86F6 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:44:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=4.679, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id emrvrnZPudc6 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:44:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (mailgw9.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6739921F86E4 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:44:36 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c1b4fb39-b7b3eae00000252a-c7-4f16e8e0bd15 Received: from esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 9D.D7.09514.0E8E61F4; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 16:44:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from ESESSCMS0360.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.48]) by esessmw0184.eemea.ericsson.se ([10.2.3.53]) with mapi; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 16:44:32 +0100 From: Daniele Ceccarelli To: "ccamp@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 16:44:31 +0100 Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-01.txt Thread-Index: AczV9vtFawGvUkXkQLe2a1rUUsUF6wAABMkg Message-ID: References: <20120118153553.19518.35167.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20120118153553.19518.35167.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: it-IT, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Subject: Re: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-01.txt X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:44:37 -0000 Hi CCAMP, =20 We have uploaded the -01 version of the OSPF OTN draft and the -03 version = of the OTN info model one. The OSPF one has been updated according to the comments receiverd Fred Grum= an on the mailing list and some suggestions from the authors. We have not changed the Switching Capability part (the discussion has not b= een concluded but the draft needed an update). What is changed from the last -01 version is: =20 - Added Section 5.2.1: Example of different TSGs - Added Section 5.7: Example of non homogeneous hierarchies - Added text to section to section 4.1 on OUDflex max lsp bandwidth adverti= sement On the other hand, in case of variable containers (Type 2) the Unreserved/MAX LSP Bandwidth fields MUST be 32 bits long and expressed in IEEE floating point format. The advertisement of the MAX LSP bandwidth MUST take into account HO OPUk bit rate tolerance and be calculated according to the following formula: =20 Max LSP BW =3D (# available TS) * (ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate) * (1-HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) =20 - Added text to section 4.1 on ODUflex resizable and non resizable advertis= ement =20 With respect to ODUflex, ODUflex CBR and ODUflex GFP-F MUST always be advertised separately as they use different adaptation functions. In the case both GFP-F resizable and non resizable (i.e. 21 and 22) are supported, Signal Type 21 implicitely supports also signal Signal Type 22, so only Signal Type 21 MUST be advertised. Signal Type 22 MUST be used only for non resizable resources. =20 On the other side, with respect to the info model doc, we modified the TSG = section as per the outcomes of Taipei meeting (split of the section between= data plane and control plane considerataions). Section 4.1 with related su= bparagraphs. BR =20 Daniele, Sergio, Pietro >-----Original Message----- >From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org]=20 >On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org >Sent: mercoled=EC 18 gennaio 2012 16.36 >To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >Cc: ccamp@ietf.org >Subject: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-01.txt > > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line=20 >Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the=20 >Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. > > Title : Traffic Engineering Extensions to=20 >OSPF for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Control of Evolving G.709=20 >OTN Networks > Author(s) : Daniele Ceccarelli > Diego Caviglia > Fatai Zhang > Dan Li > Sergio Belotti > Pietro Vittorio Grandi > Rajan Rao > Khuzema Pithewan > John E Drake > Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-01.txt > Pages : 31 > Date : 2012-01-18 > > The recent revision of ITU-T Recommendation G.709 [G709-V3] has > introduced new fixed and flexible ODU containers, enabling optimized > support for an increasingly abundant service mix. > > This document describes OSPF routing protocol extensions to support > Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) control of all currently defined ODU > containers, in support of both sub-lambda and lambda level routing > granularity. > > >A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf >-g709v3-01.txt > >Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: >ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf- >g709v3-01.txt > >_______________________________________________ >CCAMP mailing list >CCAMP@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp >= From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Jan 18 18:05:35 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEBC011E80ED; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:05:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.475 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.475 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.124, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7wzFB7IffJxD; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:05:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7DE11E8093; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:05:35 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.64p1 Message-ID: <20120119020535.29932.85296.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:05:35 -0800 Cc: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-05.txt X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 02:05:36 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane = Working Group of the IETF. Title : Link Management Protocol Behavior Negotiation and Config= uration Modifications Author(s) : Dan Li Daniele Ceccarelli Lou Berger Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-05.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2012-01-16 The Link Management Protocol (LMP) is used to coordinate the properties, use, and faults of data links in Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks. This document defines an extension to LMP to negotiate capabilities and indicate support for LMP extensions. The defined extension is compatible with non-supporting implementations. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiati= on-05.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiatio= n-05.txt From huawei.danli@huawei.com Wed Jan 18 18:19:16 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3586B11E80F9 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:19:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qcxm1RUC82Im for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:19:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C3A111E80ED for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:19:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LY0009HHX42Z7@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for ccamp@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:19:14 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LY0002NYX42K7@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for ccamp@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:19:14 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml209-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id AGK48601; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:19:13 +0800 Received: from SZXEML409-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.136) by szxeml209-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.184) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:19:03 +0800 Received: from l00037133 (10.70.77.78) by szxeml409-hub.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.136) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:18:50 +0800 Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:18:51 +0800 From: Dan Li X-Originating-IP: [10.70.77.78] To: ccamp@ietf.org Message-id: <079901ccd650$af88fd20$4e4d460a@china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3664 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3664 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected References: <20120119020535.29932.85296.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-05.txt X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 02:19:16 -0000 Dear CCAMPers, We just update the draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation with 05 version. Nothing has been changed except the expired date. To move things forward, we would like to do an informal and *confidential* survey of current implementations. We would really appreciate it if you could take 1 minute to send a private message to the WG co-chairs of CCAMP. Thanks, Authors of this draft ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Cc: Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:05 AM Subject: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-05.txt > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. > > Title : Link Management Protocol Behavior Negotiation and Configuration Modifications > Author(s) : Dan Li > Daniele Ceccarelli > Lou Berger > Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-05.txt > Pages : 11 > Date : 2012-01-16 > > The Link Management Protocol (LMP) is used to coordinate the > properties, use, and faults of data links in Generalized > Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks. This document > defines an extension to LMP to negotiate capabilities and indicate > support for LMP extensions. The defined extension is compatible > with non-supporting implementations. > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-05.txt > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-05.txt > > _______________________________________________ > CCAMP mailing list > CCAMP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp From IBryskin@advaoptical.com Tue Jan 24 07:05:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E078C21F8638 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 07:05:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.843 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.843 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.104, BAYES_20=-0.74, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nBpljvQGdYZX for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 07:05:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.advaoptical.com (mail.advaoptical.com [91.217.199.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3938C21F8637 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 07:05:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from MUC-SRV-MAIL10.advaoptical.com (muc-srv-mail10.advaoptical.com [172.20.1.59]) by muc-vsrv-fsmail.advaoptical.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0OF5JOr005489 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:05:19 +0100 Received: from ATL-SRV-MAIL10.atl.advaoptical.com (2002:5bd9:c7c8:8000:0:5efe:172.16.5.39) by MUC-SRV-MAIL10.advaoptical.com (2002:5bd9:c7c8:8000:0:5efe:172.20.1.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.247.3; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:05:19 +0100 Received: from ATL-SRV-MAIL10.atl.advaoptical.com ([fe80::c4d6:b136:bc16:77ae]) by atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com ([fe80::c4d6:b136:bc16:77ae%17]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:05:17 -0500 From: Igor Bryskin To: "ccamp@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: MIB for manual management of WDM connections Thread-Index: AczaqSeJ2POTLMmuSpmuiIbs/wOzrg== Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:05:17 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.21.1.111] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0B9Fatlsrvmail10atl_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.6.7361, 1.0.211, 0.0.0000 definitions=2012-01-24_06:2012-01-24, 2012-01-24, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 Subject: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:05:30 -0000 --_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0B9Fatlsrvmail10atl_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Can anyone tell me which RFC describes a MIB for managing WDM layer connect= ions (cross-connects, termination, etc.) hop-by-hop via Management Plane? Thanks, Igor --_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0B9Fatlsrvmail10atl_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

Can anyone tell me which RFC describes a MIB for man= aging WDM layer connections (cross-connects, termination, etc.) hop-by-hop = via Management Plane?

Thanks,

Igor

--_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0B9Fatlsrvmail10atl_-- From db3546@att.com Tue Jan 24 08:02:24 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2741121F85E0 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:02:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2GTcF+ZFPtEU for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:02:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail120.messagelabs.com (mail120.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.83]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61CD921F85C2 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:02:23 -0800 (PST) X-Env-Sender: db3546@att.com X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-120.messagelabs.com!1327420941!46194985!1 X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.145] X-StarScan-Version: 6.4.3; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 26796 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2012 16:02:22 -0000 Received: from sbcsmtp6.sbc.com (HELO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.145) by server-12.tower-120.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 24 Jan 2012 16:02:22 -0000 Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0OG2oUd023373; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:02:51 -0500 Received: from sflint01.pst.cso.att.com (sflint01.pst.cso.att.com [144.154.234.228]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0OG2jkb023269 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:02:45 -0500 Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUB9C.ITServices.sbc.com (misout7msghub9c.itservices.sbc.com [144.151.223.82]) by sflint01.pst.cso.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:02:03 -0500 Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSR9O.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.6.34]) by MISOUT7MSGHUB9C.ITServices.sbc.com ([144.151.223.82]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:02:02 -0500 From: "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" To: Igor Bryskin , "ccamp@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: MIB for manual management of WDM connections Thread-Index: AczaqSeJ2POTLMmuSpmuiIbs/wOzrgAB2OSw Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:02:02 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.51.5] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C80D7CB7MISOUT7MSGUSR9OIT_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-RSA-Action: allow Subject: Re: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:02:24 -0000 --_000_F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C80D7CB7MISOUT7MSGUSR9OIT_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Igor, Not sure what you are looking for - RFC3591 has MIBs and there's new work i= n ccamp on G.698.2. Deborah From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of I= gor Bryskin Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:05 AM To: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections Hi, Can anyone tell me which RFC describes a MIB for managing WDM layer connect= ions (cross-connects, termination, etc.) hop-by-hop via Management Plane? Thanks, Igor --_000_F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C80D7CB7MISOUT7MSGUSR9OIT_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Igor,

Not sure what you are = looking for – RFC3591 has MIBs and there’s new work in ccamp on= G.698.2.

Deborah

From: ccamp-bo= unces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Igor Bryskin
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:05 AM
To: ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections

Hi,

Can anyone tell me which RFC describes a MIB for man= aging WDM layer connections (cross-connects, termination, etc.) hop-by-hop = via Management Plane?

Thanks,

Igor

--_000_F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C80D7CB7MISOUT7MSGUSR9OIT_-- From IBryskin@advaoptical.com Tue Jan 24 08:44:54 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E47D921F85EC for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:44:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.877, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wUf8TUXJ6mmV for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:44:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.advaoptical.com (mail.advaoptical.com [91.217.199.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C6CE21F851A for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 08:44:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from MUC-SRV-MAIL10.advaoptical.com (muc-srv-mail10.advaoptical.com [172.20.1.59]) by muc-vsrv-fsmail.advaoptical.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0OGijob028362 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:44:45 +0100 Received: from ATL-SRV-MAIL10.atl.advaoptical.com (2002:5bd9:c7c8:8000:0:5efe:172.16.5.39) by MUC-SRV-MAIL10.advaoptical.com (2002:5bd9:c7c8:8000:0:5efe:172.20.1.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.247.3; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:44:44 +0100 Received: from ATL-SRV-MAIL10.atl.advaoptical.com ([fe80::c4d6:b136:bc16:77ae]) by atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com ([fe80::c4d6:b136:bc16:77ae%17]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:44:40 -0500 From: Igor Bryskin To: "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" , "ccamp@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: MIB for manual management of WDM connections Thread-Index: AczaqSeJ2POTLMmuSpmuiIbs/wOzrgAB2OSwAAGhbfA= Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:44:40 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.21.1.111] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0C47atlsrvmail10atl_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.6.7361, 1.0.211, 0.0.0000 definitions=2012-01-24_06:2012-01-24, 2012-01-24, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 Subject: Re: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:44:55 -0000 --_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0C47atlsrvmail10atl_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Deborah, >From RFC3591: "This memo does not define MIB objects for optical system cross- connects. After a consensus is reached on definitions of the interface MIB objects for optical systems (resulting from resolution of discussions on the objects proposed in this memo), work can progress on the definitions of tables to represent cross-connects (e.g., OCh optical cross-connects and ODUk electrical cross- connects)." I am actually looking for a standard MIB that would allow me to configure e= nd-to-end and hop-by-hop WDM layer connections. Igor From: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A [mailto:db3546@att.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:02 AM To: Igor Bryskin; ccamp@ietf.org Subject: RE: MIB for manual management of WDM connections Hi Igor, Not sure what you are looking for - RFC3591 has MIBs and there's new work i= n ccamp on G.698.2. Deborah From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of I= gor Bryskin Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:05 AM To: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections Hi, Can anyone tell me which RFC describes a MIB for managing WDM layer connect= ions (cross-connects, termination, etc.) hop-by-hop via Management Plane? Thanks, Igor --_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0C47atlsrvmail10atl_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Deborah,

From RFC3591:

“This memo does not define MIB objects for opti=
cal system cross-

connects. After a consensus is reached = on definitions of the

interface MIB objects for optical systems (re= sulting from resolution

of discussions on the objects proposed in thi= s memo), work can

progress on the definitions of tables to repr= esent cross-connects

(e.g., OCh optical cross-connects and ODUk el= ectrical cross-

connects).”

I am actually looking for a standard MIB that would allow = me to configure end-to-end and hop-by-hop WDM layer connections.=

Igor

From: BRUNGARD= , DEBORAH A [mailto:db3546@att.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:02 AM
To: Igor Bryskin; ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: RE: MIB for manual management of WDM connections=

Hi Igor,

Not sure what you are = looking for – RFC3591 has MIBs and there’s new work in ccamp on= G.698.2.

Deborah

Hi,

Can anyone tell me which RFC describes a MIB for man= aging WDM layer connections (cross-connects, termination, etc.) hop-by-hop = via Management Plane?

Thanks,

Igor

--_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0C47atlsrvmail10atl_-- From adrian@olddog.co.uk Tue Jan 24 10:43:07 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33B8121F84C8 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:43:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Tmbbs6tyvNuA for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:43:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3427521F84C5 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:43:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0OIgwYg009334; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:42:58 GMT Received: from 950129200 (ns-visitor-nsrp.juniper.net [208.223.208.242]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0OIgsM8009302 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:42:56 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Igor Bryskin'" , "'BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A'" , References:

In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:42:55 -0000 Message-ID: <00d701ccdac7$fe068910$fa139b30$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00D8_01CCDAC7.FE0CA390" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQJqWE35icKoNh1V+JVS/1ByHImvdQHKEwHDArOno1CUvO8TgA== Content-Language: en-gb Subject: Re: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:43:07 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00D8_01CCDAC7.FE0CA390 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I would use the GMPLS MIB modules. In particular, I would use the LSR MIB module (RFC4803). If you look at section 4.2 you will find a description of configuring static LSPs. You might find that some of the detailed parameters for recent optical developments are lacking. In particular, I don't think the IANA Textual Conventions at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib has been updated recently. Adrian From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Igor Bryskin Sent: 24 January 2012 16:45 To: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; ccamp@ietf.org Subject: Re: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections Deborah, >From RFC3591: "This memo does not define MIB objects for optical system cross- connects. After a consensus is reached on definitions of the interface MIB objects for optical systems (resulting from resolution of discussions on the objects proposed in this memo), work can progress on the definitions of tables to represent cross-connects (e.g., OCh optical cross-connects and ODUk electrical cross- connects)." I am actually looking for a standard MIB that would allow me to configure end-to-end and hop-by-hop WDM layer connections. Igor From: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A [mailto:db3546@att.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:02 AM To: Igor Bryskin; ccamp@ietf.org Subject: RE: MIB for manual management of WDM connections Hi Igor, Not sure what you are looking for - RFC3591 has MIBs and there's new work in ccamp on G.698.2. Deborah From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Igor Bryskin Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:05 AM To: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections Hi, Can anyone tell me which RFC describes a MIB for managing WDM layer connections (cross-connects, termination, etc.) hop-by-hop via Management Plane? Thanks, Igor ------=_NextPart_000_00D8_01CCDAC7.FE0CA390 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I would use the GMPLS = MIB modules.

In particular, I would = use the LSR MIB module (RFC4803). If you look at section 4.2 you will = find a description of configuring static LSPs.

You might find that = some of the detailed parameters for recent optical developments are = lacking. In particular, I don't think the IANA Textual Conventions at = http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib has been updated = recently.

Adrian

From: = ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Igor Bryskin
Sent: 24 January 2012 16:45
To: = BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] MIB = for manual management of WDM = connections

Deborah,

From = RFC3591:

“This memo does not define MIB objects =
for optical system cross-

connects. After a = consensus is reached on definitions of the

interface MIB objects for = optical systems (resulting from resolution

of discussions on the objects = proposed in this memo), work can

progress on the definitions = of tables to represent cross-connects

(e.g., OCh optical = cross-connects and ODUk electrical cross-

= connects).”

I am actually looking for a standard MIB = that would allow me to configure end-to-end and hop-by-hop WDM layer = connections.

Igor

<= /p>

From: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A [mailto:db3546@att.com] =
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:02 AM
To: Igor = Bryskin; ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: RE: MIB for manual management = of WDM connections

Hi = Igor,

<= /p>

Not sure what you are = looking for – RFC3591 has MIBs and there’s new work in ccamp = on G.698.2.

<= /p>

Deborah=

<= /p>

From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] = On Behalf Of Igor Bryskin
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, = 2012 10:05 AM
To: ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: [CCAMP] = MIB for manual management of WDM = connections

Hi,

Can anyone tell me which RFC describes = a MIB for managing WDM layer connections (cross-connects, termination, = etc.) hop-by-hop via Management Plane?

Thanks,

Igor

<= /body> ------=_NextPart_000_00D8_01CCDAC7.FE0CA390-- From IBryskin@advaoptical.com Tue Jan 24 11:22:30 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B69611E809B for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:22:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.013 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.013 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.585, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NT9g9wYJI9Xn for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:22:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.advaoptical.com (mail.advaoptical.com [91.217.199.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8860C11E8072 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:22:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from MUC-SRV-MAIL10.advaoptical.com (muc-srv-mail10.advaoptical.com [172.20.1.59]) by muc-vsrv-fsmail.advaoptical.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0OJMKU6022476 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 24 Jan 2012 20:22:20 +0100 Received: from ATL-SRV-MAIL10.atl.advaoptical.com (2002:5bd9:c7c8:8000:0:5efe:172.16.5.39) by MUC-SRV-MAIL10.advaoptical.com (2002:5bd9:c7c8:8000:0:5efe:172.20.1.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.247.3; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 20:22:19 +0100 Received: from ATL-SRV-MAIL10.atl.advaoptical.com ([fe80::c4d6:b136:bc16:77ae]) by atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com ([fe80::c4d6:b136:bc16:77ae%17]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:22:17 -0500 From: Igor Bryskin To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , "'BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A'" , "ccamp@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections Thread-Index: AczaqSeJ2POTLMmuSpmuiIbs/wOzrgAB2OSwAAGhbfAADrUJgAAJImRg Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:22:16 +0000 Message-ID: References:

<00d701ccdac7$fe068910$fa139b30$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <00d701ccdac7$fe068910$fa139b30$@olddog.co.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.21.1.81] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0CDDatlsrvmail10atl_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.6.7361, 1.0.211, 0.0.0000 definitions=2012-01-24_06:2012-01-24, 2012-01-24, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 Subject: Re: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:22:30 -0000 --_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0CDDatlsrvmail10atl_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks, this helps. Igor From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 1:43 PM To: Igor Bryskin; 'BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A'; ccamp@ietf.org Subject: RE: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections I would use the GMPLS MIB modules. In particular, I would use the LSR MIB module (RFC4803). If you look at sec= tion 4.2 you will find a description of configuring static LSPs. You might find that some of the detailed parameters for recent optical deve= lopments are lacking. In particular, I don't think the IANA Textual Convent= ions at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib has been updated re= cently. Adrian From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of I= gor Bryskin Sent: 24 January 2012 16:45 To: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; ccamp@ietf.org Subject: Re: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections Deborah, >From RFC3591: "This memo does not define MIB objects for optical system cross- connects. After a consensus is reached on definitions of the interface MIB objects for optical systems (resulting from resolution of discussions on the objects proposed in this memo), work can progress on the definitions of tables to represent cross-connects (e.g., OCh optical cross-connects and ODUk electrical cross- connects)." I am actually looking for a standard MIB that would allow me to configure e= nd-to-end and hop-by-hop WDM layer connections. Igor From: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A [mailto:db3546@att.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:02 AM To: Igor Bryskin; ccamp@ietf.org Subject: RE: MIB for manual management of WDM connections Hi Igor, Not sure what you are looking for - RFC3591 has MIBs and there's new work i= n ccamp on G.698.2. Deborah From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of I= gor Bryskin Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:05 AM To: ccamp@ietf.org Subject: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections Hi, Can anyone tell me which RFC describes a MIB for managing WDM layer connect= ions (cross-connects, termination, etc.) hop-by-hop via Management Plane? Thanks, Igor --_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0CDDatlsrvmail10atl_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks, this helps.

Igor=

From: Adrian F= arrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 1:43 PM
To: Igor Bryskin; 'BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A'; ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections

I would= use the GMPLS MIB modules.

&n= bsp;

In part= icular, I would use the LSR MIB module (RFC4803). If you look at section 4.= 2 you will find a description of configuring static LSPs.=

&n= bsp;

You mig= ht find that some of the detailed parameters for recent optical development= s are lacking. In particular, I don't think the IANA Textual Conventions at= http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib has been updated recently.

&n= bsp;

Adrian<= o:p>

&n= bsp;

From: ccamp-bo= unces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Igor Bryskin
Sent: 24 January 2012 16:45
To: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] MIB for manual management of WDM connections

Deborah,

From RFC3591:

“This memo does not define MIB objects for opti=
cal system cross-

connects. After a consensus is reached = on definitions of the

interface MIB objects for optical systems (re= sulting from resolution

of discussions on the objects proposed in thi= s memo), work can

progress on the definitions of tables to repr= esent cross-connects

(e.g., OCh optical cross-connects and ODUk el= ectrical cross-

connects).”

I am actually looking for a standard MIB that would allow = me to configure end-to-end and hop-by-hop WDM layer connections.=

Igor

Hi Igor,

Not sure what you are = looking for – RFC3591 has MIBs and there’s new work in ccamp on= G.698.2.

Deborah

Hi,

Can anyone tell me which RFC describes a MIB for man= aging WDM layer connections (cross-connects, termination, etc.) hop-by-hop = via Management Plane?

Thanks,

Igor

--_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A08AD0CDDatlsrvmail10atl_-- From adrian@olddog.co.uk Wed Jan 25 00:25:55 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 461F321F8699; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:25:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pKMin18SMWnR; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:25:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0605421F86A0; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:25:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0P8Pqoj016068; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:25:52 GMT Received: from 950129200 ([12.233.202.194]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0P8PnAX016060 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:25:51 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Lou Berger'" Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:25:49 -0000 Message-ID: <024301ccdb3a$f309beb0$d91d3c10$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AczbOttWJaghZydsQeSfv4/Y76HKaA== Content-Language: en-gb Cc: 'CCAMP' , 'IESG' Subject: Re: [CCAMP] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:25:55 -0000 Lou and Deborah, Thanks for this question. The IESG takes the IETF's IPR rules very = seriously and is very worried about any breach of the rules documented = in BCP 79. We note that authors' attention is drawn to BCP 79 by the = "Note Well" and the I-D boilerplate text. While we would hope for self-correction by the individuals involved, the = IESG is keen to empower working group chairs to take proportionate = action against working group participants who flout the IETF IPR rules = and so disrupt the smooth running of the working group. We would like = the working group chairs to be able to select the appropriate actions = since they are closest to the details of the issue, but we also = acknowledge that this may be uncomfortable or difficult for the chairs = and the responsible AD is available to guide or direct the action if = necessary.=20 Firstly, it is important that the working group be given every = opportunity to examine the disclosed IPR and to determine whether they = wish to develop an alternative approach that avoids the IPR. This is = business as usual for the working group. I suggest you approach this as = a consensus call with a fixed period and closed questions to which = people are free to supply supporting arguments. Secondly, the working group chairs, acting for the working group, need = to decide what to do about the individuals who broke the IPR rules. = There is a range of sanctions you can apply, and which you choose (zero, = one, or more) will depend upon how disruptive the behavior was, and how = clearly the individuals were in breach. Maybe the failure to comply is = easily judged as an accident, or maybe the authors really should have = realized what they needed to do. Perhaps the individuals have been = speedy and humble in their apologies. You will be closest to = understanding the details and best able to determine which sanction is = most fitting. Some of the sanctions available to you are: - Request the IESG to initiate a posting rights (PR) action that bans the individual from posting to a mailing list (in this case CCAMP's) for a significant period of time or until it is revoked [RFC3683] - Apply a PR action to the CCAMP list for a period of up to 30 days as described in [RFC2418] updated by [RFC3934]. - Remove the individuals as working group document editors on specific documents or across the whole working group. - Move the individuals' names to the "Acknowledgements" section of the document with or without a note explaining why they are listed there and not in the "Authors' Addresses" section. - Continue to refuse to accept the individuals as editors of any new working group documents. - Announce to the working group the failure by the individuals ("name and shame")=20 - Send an on-or-off-list warning that the individuals must raise their game or risk one of the other sanctions. - Have a private discussion with the individual to understand what went wrong and how it can be prevented in the future. You will want to be sure that the chosen sanctions match the gravity of = the offence and that you apply your judgement equitably should similar = situations arise in the future. Please let me know if you would prefer me to offer stronger guidance or = direct the action myself. Cheers, Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net] > Sent: 17 January 2012 16:13 > To: Adrian Farrel > Cc: IESG; CCAMP > Subject: Fwd: IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement = about IPR > related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 >=20 > Adrian, (IESG members,) >=20 > The CCAMP WG received the enclosed IPR statement on January 9, 2012. = It > refers to a draft and patent applications that have shared authorship. > The patent applications were filed in June and July of 2008. > draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-00 was published August 29, 2008, and was > based on draft-bernstein-ccamp-wson-info which was first published > October 30, 2007. >=20 > Given Sections 6.2.1 and 7 of RFC 3979, as well as the IESG page on > Intellectual Property > = (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/IntellectualProperty), > we would like to ask for your guidance on the handling of the = identified > draft, as well as related drafts with the same authors, within the > working group. We, the CCAMP chairs, believe that the working group's > handling of / response to this should be consistent with, and in the > context of, an IETF-wide approach to such matters. >=20 > Here are some relevant links from the ccamp archive: > A message sent to the WG on this disclosure and resulting responses: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg13034.html > Publication of draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-00: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg00453.html > Poll on accepting individual draft as WG document: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg00417.html > & http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg00355.html > Individual publication of draft-bernstein-ccamp-wson-info-00: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg09597.html >=20 > Thank you, > Lou and Deborah > CCAMP WG Chairs >=20 > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement = about > IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 > Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:42:21 -0800 > From: IETF Secretariat > To: ylee@huawei.com, gregb@grotto-networking.com, danli@huawei.com, > imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp, > CC: stbryant@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk, ccamp@ietf.org, > lberger@labn.net, dbrungard@att.com, ipr-announce@ietf.org >=20 >=20 > Dear Young Lee, Greg Bernstein, Dan Li, Wataru Imajuku: >=20 > An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled > "Routing and > Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Switched = Optical > Networks" (draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info) was submitted to the IETF > Secretariat on > 2012-01-09 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual > Property Rights > Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1662/). The title of = the IPR > disclosure is "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR = related to > draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13.""); >=20 > The IETF Secretariat >=20 >=20 >=20 From huawei.danli@huawei.com Thu Jan 26 17:57:38 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6FF021F864D; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:57:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.075 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.075 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-4.524, BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id no60eOwE3NzP; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:57:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97DB221F864B; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:57:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LYF00DZ3PFWIP@szxga05-in.huawei.com>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:57:32 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LYF005G1PFWXH@szxga05-in.huawei.com>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:57:32 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml210-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id AGO97013; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:55:52 +0800 Received: from SZXEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.31) by szxeml210-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.183) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:55:35 +0800 Received: from SZXEML538-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.171]) by szxeml401-hub.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:55:43 +0800 Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 01:55:42 +0000 From: Huawei danli In-reply-to: <024301ccdb3a$f309beb0$d91d3c10$@olddog.co.uk> X-Originating-IP: [172.24.1.46] To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , 'Lou Berger' , "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTSI)" Message-id: <92A1F6CF27D54D4DA5364E59D892A02A0D1B8976@szxeml538-mbx.china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Content-language: zh-CN Content-transfer-encoding: base64 Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Thread-topic: [CCAMP] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-13 Thread-index: AczbOttWJaghZydsQeSfv4/Y76HKaABWe1JT X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected References: <024301ccdb3a$f309beb0$d91d3c10$@olddog.co.uk> Cc: 'CCAMP' , 'IESG' Subject: [CCAMP] =?gb2312?b?tPC4tDogIElQUiBEaXNjbG9zdXJlOiBIdWF3ZWkgVGVj?= =?gb2312?b?aG5vbG9naWVzIENvLiwJTHRkJ3MgU3RhdGVtZW50IGFib3V0IElQUiByZWxh?= =?gb2312?b?dGVkIHRvIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtcndhLWluZm8tMTM=?= X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 01:57:38 -0000 RGVhciBDQ0FNUCBjby1jaGFpcnMsDQoNCkZvciB0aGUgcmVjZW50IHR3byBJUFIgZGlzY2xvc3Vy ZXMgcmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSBkcmFmdHMgaW4gQ0NBTVAsIHdlIGFyZSB2ZXJ5IHNvcnJ5IGZvciB0 aGUgY29uZnVzaW9uLiBXZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVseSBpbnZlc3RpZ2F0ZWQgb3VyIGludGVybmFsIElQ UiBkaXNjbG9zdXJlIHByb2Nlc3MuIFRoZXNlIHR3byBJUFIgZGlzY2xvc3VyZXMgYXJlIGxhdGUg ZGlzY2xvc3VyZXMgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIFJGQzM5NzkuIFdlIGZvdW5kIHRoYXQgdGhlcmUgd2Fz IGEgZ2FwIGluIHRoZSBwYXN0IGJldHdlZW4gdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWwgYW5kIHRoZSBjb21wYW55 IHJlc3BvbnNpYmlsaXR5LCBhbmQgd2UgYXJlIHRyeWluZyB0byBmaXggb3VyIElQUiBkaXNjbG9z dXJlIHByb2Nlc3MuDQogDQpUbyBzaG93IGdvb2QgZmFpdGggaW4gYWRkcmVzc2luZyBwYXN0IGlz c3VlcywgSHVhd2VpIHdpbGwgbmV2ZXIgYXNzZXJ0IHRoZXNlIHR3byBwYXRlbnRzIChpbiBkcmFm dC1pZXRmLWNjYW1wLXJ3YS1pbmZvIGFuZCBSRkM2MzQ0L2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtZ21wbHMt dmNhdC1sY2FzKSBhZ2FpbnN0IGFueSBwYXJ0eS4gTXkgY29sbGVhZ3VlIGZyb20gb3VyIExlZ2Fs IEFmZmFpciBEZXBhcnRtZW50IHdpbGwgdXBkYXRlIHRoZXNlIHR3byBJUFIgZGlzY2xvc3VyZXMg dG8gY29tZmlybSB0aGF0IEh1YXdlaSB3aWxsIG5ldmVyIGFzc2VydCB0aGVzZSB0d28gcGF0ZW50 cyB0byBhZ2FpbnN0IGFueSBwYXJ0eS4NCiANCldlIGFyZSBhbHNvIGF3YXJlIG9mIG90aGVyIHBh dGVudHMgbWF5YmUgcmVsYXRlZCB0byBzb21lIGRyYWZ0cyBzdWNoIGFzIFJGQzYwNzMgYW5kIFJG QzYxNjMsIHdlIGFyZSBjdXJyZW50IGludmVzdGlnYXRpbmcgdGhlc2UgY2FzZXMuIE9uY2UgdGhl IGNhc2UgaXMgY29uZmlybWVkIHRoYXQgdGhlIGRyYWZ0cyBhcmUgcmVsYXRlZCB0byBzb21lIHBh dGVudHMsIHRoZW4gb3VyIElQIExhdyB0ZWFtIHdpbGwgd29yayBvbiBkaXNjbG9zdXJpbmcsIGFu ZCB3aGljaCB3aWxsIGJlIGRpc2Nsb3N1cmVkIG9yIGFkZGVkIGFzIGFuIGFtZW5kbWVudCB0byB0 aGUgY3VycmVudCBkaXNjbG9zdXJlLCB3aXRoIHRoZSBzYW1lIG5vbi1hc3NlcnQgdGVybXMuDQoN CldlIGFyZSB2ZXJ5IHNvcnJ5IGZvciB0aGUgcHJvYmxlbXMgdGhpcyBpcyBjYXVzaW5nLCB0aGF0 IHdlIGFyZSB3b3JraW5nIGFzIGJlc3QgYXMgd2UgY2FuIHRvIGNvcnJlY3QgYWxsIHRoZSBvdmVy c2lnaHRzLCBhbmQgdGhhdCBpdCB3aWxsIG5vdCBoYXBwZW4gYWdhaW4uIA0KDQpXZSBob3BlIHRo aXMgc3RhdGVtZW50IGNhbiBoZWxwIHlvdSB0byBoYW5kbGUgdGhpcyBpc3N1ZSBwZWFjZWZ1bGx5 IGluIENDQU1QLCBhcyB3ZWxsIGFzIGluIElFVEYuDQoNCkJlc3QgcmVnYXJkcywNCg0KRGFuIExp DQoNCkh1YXdlaSBUZWNobm9sb2dpZXMgQ28uLCBMdGQuDQoNCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0Kt6K8/sjLOiBjY2FtcC1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIFtj Y2FtcC1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSC0+rHtIEFkcmlhbiBGYXJyZWwgW2FkcmlhbkBvbGRkb2cu Y28udWtdDQq3osvNyrG85DogMjAxMsTqMdTCMjXI1SAxNjoyNQ0Ktb06ICdMb3UgQmVyZ2VyJw0K Q2M6ICdDQ0FNUCc7ICdJRVNHJw0K1vfM4jogUmU6IFtDQ0FNUF0gSVBSIERpc2Nsb3N1cmU6IEh1 YXdlaSBUZWNobm9sb2dpZXMgQ28uLCAgICAgICAgTHRkJ3MgU3RhdGVtZW50IGFib3V0IElQUiBy ZWxhdGVkIHRvIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtcndhLWluZm8tMTMNCg0KTG91IGFuZCBEZWJvcmFo LA0KDQpUaGFua3MgZm9yIHRoaXMgcXVlc3Rpb24uICBUaGUgSUVTRyB0YWtlcyB0aGUgSUVURidz IElQUiBydWxlcyB2ZXJ5IHNlcmlvdXNseSBhbmQgaXMgdmVyeSB3b3JyaWVkIGFib3V0IGFueSBi cmVhY2ggb2YgdGhlIHJ1bGVzIGRvY3VtZW50ZWQgaW4gQkNQIDc5LiBXZSBub3RlIHRoYXQgYXV0 aG9ycycgYXR0ZW50aW9uIGlzIGRyYXduIHRvIEJDUCA3OSBieSB0aGUgIk5vdGUgV2VsbCIgYW5k IHRoZSBJLUQgYm9pbGVycGxhdGUgdGV4dC4NCg0KV2hpbGUgd2Ugd291bGQgaG9wZSBmb3Igc2Vs Zi1jb3JyZWN0aW9uIGJ5IHRoZSBpbmRpdmlkdWFscyBpbnZvbHZlZCwgdGhlIElFU0cgaXMga2Vl biB0byBlbXBvd2VyIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgY2hhaXJzIHRvIHRha2UgcHJvcG9ydGlvbmF0ZSBh Y3Rpb24gYWdhaW5zdCB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIHBhcnRpY2lwYW50cyB3aG8gZmxvdXQgdGhlIElF VEYgSVBSIHJ1bGVzIGFuZCBzbyBkaXNydXB0IHRoZSBzbW9vdGggcnVubmluZyBvZiB0aGUgd29y a2luZyBncm91cC4gV2Ugd291bGQgbGlrZSB0aGUgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBjaGFpcnMgdG8gYmUg YWJsZSB0byBzZWxlY3QgdGhlIGFwcHJvcHJpYXRlIGFjdGlvbnMgc2luY2UgdGhleSBhcmUgY2xv c2VzdCB0byB0aGUgZGV0YWlscyBvZiB0aGUgaXNzdWUsIGJ1dCB3ZSBhbHNvIGFja25vd2xlZGdl IHRoYXQgdGhpcyBtYXkgYmUgdW5jb21mb3J0YWJsZSBvciBkaWZmaWN1bHQgZm9yIHRoZSBjaGFp cnMgYW5kIHRoZSByZXNwb25zaWJsZSBBRCBpcyBhdmFpbGFibGUgdG8gZ3VpZGUgb3IgZGlyZWN0 IHRoZSBhY3Rpb24gaWYgbmVjZXNzYXJ5Lg0KDQpGaXJzdGx5LCBpdCBpcyBpbXBvcnRhbnQgdGhh dCB0aGUgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBiZSBnaXZlbiBldmVyeSBvcHBvcnR1bml0eSB0byBleGFtaW5l IHRoZSBkaXNjbG9zZWQgSVBSIGFuZCB0byBkZXRlcm1pbmUgd2hldGhlciB0aGV5IHdpc2ggdG8g ZGV2ZWxvcCBhbiBhbHRlcm5hdGl2ZSBhcHByb2FjaCB0aGF0IGF2b2lkcyB0aGUgSVBSLiBUaGlz IGlzIGJ1c2luZXNzIGFzIHVzdWFsIGZvciB0aGUgd29ya2luZyBncm91cC4gSSBzdWdnZXN0IHlv dSBhcHByb2FjaCB0aGlzIGFzIGEgY29uc2Vuc3VzIGNhbGwgd2l0aCBhIGZpeGVkIHBlcmlvZCBh bmQgY2xvc2VkIHF1ZXN0aW9ucyB0byB3aGljaCBwZW9wbGUgYXJlIGZyZWUgdG8gc3VwcGx5IHN1 cHBvcnRpbmcgYXJndW1lbnRzLg0KDQpTZWNvbmRseSwgdGhlIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgY2hhaXJz LCBhY3RpbmcgZm9yIHRoZSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwLCBuZWVkIHRvIGRlY2lkZSB3aGF0IHRvIGRv IGFib3V0IHRoZSBpbmRpdmlkdWFscyB3aG8gYnJva2UgdGhlIElQUiBydWxlcy4gVGhlcmUgaXMg YSByYW5nZSBvZiBzYW5jdGlvbnMgeW91IGNhbiBhcHBseSwgYW5kIHdoaWNoIHlvdSBjaG9vc2Ug KHplcm8sIG9uZSwgb3IgbW9yZSkgd2lsbCBkZXBlbmQgdXBvbiBob3cgZGlzcnVwdGl2ZSB0aGUg YmVoYXZpb3Igd2FzLCBhbmQgaG93IGNsZWFybHkgdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWxzIHdlcmUgaW4gYnJl YWNoLiBNYXliZSB0aGUgZmFpbHVyZSB0byBjb21wbHkgaXMgZWFzaWx5IGp1ZGdlZCBhcyBhbiBh Y2NpZGVudCwgb3IgbWF5YmUgdGhlIGF1dGhvcnMgcmVhbGx5IHNob3VsZCBoYXZlIHJlYWxpemVk IHdoYXQgdGhleSBuZWVkZWQgdG8gZG8uIFBlcmhhcHMgdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWxzIGhhdmUgYmVl biBzcGVlZHkgYW5kIGh1bWJsZSBpbiB0aGVpciBhcG9sb2dpZXMuIFlvdSB3aWxsIGJlIGNsb3Nl c3QgdG8gdW5kZXJzdGFuZGluZyB0aGUgZGV0YWlscyBhbmQgYmVzdCBhYmxlIHRvIGRldGVybWlu ZSB3aGljaCBzYW5jdGlvbiBpcyBtb3N0IGZpdHRpbmcuDQoNClNvbWUgb2YgdGhlIHNhbmN0aW9u cyBhdmFpbGFibGUgdG8geW91IGFyZToNCi0gUmVxdWVzdCB0aGUgSUVTRyB0byBpbml0aWF0ZSBh IHBvc3RpbmcgcmlnaHRzIChQUikgYWN0aW9uIHRoYXQgYmFucw0KICB0aGUgaW5kaXZpZHVhbCBm cm9tIHBvc3RpbmcgdG8gYSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QgKGluIHRoaXMgY2FzZSBDQ0FNUCdzKQ0KICBm b3IgYSBzaWduaWZpY2FudCBwZXJpb2Qgb2YgdGltZSBvciB1bnRpbCBpdCBpcyByZXZva2VkIFtS RkMzNjgzXQ0KLSBBcHBseSBhIFBSIGFjdGlvbiB0byB0aGUgQ0NBTVAgbGlzdCBmb3IgYSBwZXJp b2Qgb2YgdXAgdG8gMzAgZGF5cw0KICBhcyBkZXNjcmliZWQgaW4gW1JGQzI0MThdIHVwZGF0ZWQg YnkgW1JGQzM5MzRdLg0KLSBSZW1vdmUgdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWxzIGFzIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAg ZG9jdW1lbnQgZWRpdG9ycyBvbg0KICBzcGVjaWZpYyBkb2N1bWVudHMgb3IgYWNyb3NzIHRoZSB3 aG9sZSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwLg0KLSBNb3ZlIHRoZSBpbmRpdmlkdWFscycgbmFtZXMgdG8gdGhl ICJBY2tub3dsZWRnZW1lbnRzIiBzZWN0aW9uDQogICBvZiB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQgd2l0aCBvciB3 aXRob3V0IGEgbm90ZSBleHBsYWluaW5nIHdoeSB0aGV5IGFyZQ0KICAgbGlzdGVkIHRoZXJlIGFu ZCBub3QgaW4gdGhlICJBdXRob3JzJyBBZGRyZXNzZXMiIHNlY3Rpb24uDQotIENvbnRpbnVlIHRv IHJlZnVzZSB0byBhY2NlcHQgdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWxzIGFzIGVkaXRvcnMgb2YgYW55IG5ldw0K ICB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGRvY3VtZW50cy4NCi0gQW5ub3VuY2UgdG8gdGhlIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3Jv dXAgdGhlIGZhaWx1cmUgYnkgdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWxzDQogICgibmFtZSBhbmQgc2hhbWUiKQ0K LSBTZW5kIGFuIG9uLW9yLW9mZi1saXN0IHdhcm5pbmcgdGhhdCB0aGUgaW5kaXZpZHVhbHMgbXVz dCByYWlzZQ0KICAgdGhlaXIgZ2FtZSBvciByaXNrIG9uZSBvZiB0aGUgb3RoZXIgc2FuY3Rpb25z Lg0KLSBIYXZlIGEgcHJpdmF0ZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIHdpdGggdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWwgdG8gdW5k ZXJzdGFuZA0KICAgd2hhdCB3ZW50IHdyb25nIGFuZCBob3cgaXQgY2FuIGJlIHByZXZlbnRlZCBp biB0aGUgZnV0dXJlLg0KDQpZb3Ugd2lsbCB3YW50IHRvIGJlIHN1cmUgdGhhdCB0aGUgY2hvc2Vu IHNhbmN0aW9ucyBtYXRjaCB0aGUgZ3Jhdml0eSBvZiB0aGUgb2ZmZW5jZSBhbmQgdGhhdCB5b3Ug YXBwbHkgeW91ciBqdWRnZW1lbnQgZXF1aXRhYmx5IHNob3VsZCBzaW1pbGFyIHNpdHVhdGlvbnMg YXJpc2UgaW4gdGhlIGZ1dHVyZS4NCg0KUGxlYXNlIGxldCBtZSBrbm93IGlmIHlvdSB3b3VsZCBw cmVmZXIgbWUgdG8gb2ZmZXIgc3Ryb25nZXIgZ3VpZGFuY2Ugb3IgZGlyZWN0IHRoZSBhY3Rpb24g bXlzZWxmLg0KDQpDaGVlcnMsDQpBZHJpYW4NCg0KPiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0t LQ0KPiBGcm9tOiBMb3UgQmVyZ2VyIFttYWlsdG86bGJlcmdlckBsYWJuLm5ldF0NCj4gU2VudDog MTcgSmFudWFyeSAyMDEyIDE2OjEzDQo+IFRvOiBBZHJpYW4gRmFycmVsDQo+IENjOiBJRVNHOyBD Q0FNUA0KPiBTdWJqZWN0OiBGd2Q6IElQUiBEaXNjbG9zdXJlOiBIdWF3ZWkgVGVjaG5vbG9naWVz IENvLiwgTHRkJ3MgU3RhdGVtZW50IGFib3V0IElQUg0KPiByZWxhdGVkIHRvIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYt Y2NhbXAtcndhLWluZm8tMTMNCj4NCj4gQWRyaWFuLCAoSUVTRyBtZW1iZXJzLCkNCj4NCj4gVGhl IENDQU1QIFdHIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRoZSBlbmNsb3NlZCBJUFIgc3RhdGVtZW50IG9uIEphbnVhcnkg OSwgMjAxMi4gIEl0DQo+IHJlZmVycyB0byBhIGRyYWZ0IGFuZCBwYXRlbnQgYXBwbGljYXRpb25z IHRoYXQgaGF2ZSBzaGFyZWQgYXV0aG9yc2hpcC4NCj4gVGhlIHBhdGVudCBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMg d2VyZSBmaWxlZCBpbiBKdW5lIGFuZCBKdWx5IG9mIDIwMDguDQo+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAt cndhLWluZm8tMDAgd2FzIHB1Ymxpc2hlZCBBdWd1c3QgMjksIDIwMDgsIGFuZCB3YXMNCj4gYmFz ZWQgb24gZHJhZnQtYmVybnN0ZWluLWNjYW1wLXdzb24taW5mbyB3aGljaCB3YXMgZmlyc3QgcHVi bGlzaGVkDQo+IE9jdG9iZXIgMzAsIDIwMDcuDQo+DQo+IEdpdmVuIFNlY3Rpb25zIDYuMi4xIGFu ZCA3IG9mIFJGQyAzOTc5LCBhcyB3ZWxsIGFzIHRoZSBJRVNHIHBhZ2Ugb24NCj4gSW50ZWxsZWN0 dWFsIFByb3BlcnR5DQo+IChodHRwOi8vdHJhYy50b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZy9ncm91cC9pZXNnL3Ry YWMvd2lraS9JbnRlbGxlY3R1YWxQcm9wZXJ0eSksDQo+IHdlIHdvdWxkIGxpa2UgdG8gYXNrIGZv ciB5b3VyIGd1aWRhbmNlIG9uIHRoZSBoYW5kbGluZyBvZiB0aGUgaWRlbnRpZmllZA0KPiBkcmFm dCwgYXMgd2VsbCBhcyByZWxhdGVkIGRyYWZ0cyB3aXRoIHRoZSBzYW1lIGF1dGhvcnMsIHdpdGhp biB0aGUNCj4gd29ya2luZyBncm91cC4gIFdlLCB0aGUgQ0NBTVAgY2hhaXJzLCBiZWxpZXZlIHRo YXQgdGhlIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAncw0KPiBoYW5kbGluZyBvZiAvIHJlc3BvbnNlIHRvIHRoaXMg c2hvdWxkIGJlIGNvbnNpc3RlbnQgd2l0aCwgYW5kIGluIHRoZQ0KPiBjb250ZXh0IG9mLCBhbiBJ RVRGLXdpZGUgYXBwcm9hY2ggdG8gc3VjaCBtYXR0ZXJzLg0KPg0KPiBIZXJlIGFyZSBzb21lIHJl bGV2YW50IGxpbmtzIGZyb20gdGhlIGNjYW1wIGFyY2hpdmU6DQo+IEEgbWVzc2FnZSBzZW50IHRv IHRoZSBXRyBvbiB0aGlzIGRpc2Nsb3N1cmUgYW5kIHJlc3VsdGluZyByZXNwb25zZXM6DQo+ICAg ICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWwtYXJjaGl2ZS93ZWIvY2NhbXAvY3VycmVudC9tc2cx MzAzNC5odG1sDQo+IFB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIG9mIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtcndhLWluZm8tMDA6 DQo+ICAgICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWwtYXJjaGl2ZS93ZWIvY2NhbXAvY3VycmVu dC9tc2cwMDQ1My5odG1sDQo+IFBvbGwgb24gYWNjZXB0aW5nIGluZGl2aWR1YWwgZHJhZnQgYXMg V0cgZG9jdW1lbnQ6DQo+ICAgICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWwtYXJjaGl2ZS93ZWIv Y2NhbXAvY3VycmVudC9tc2cwMDQxNy5odG1sDQo+ICAmICBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21h aWwtYXJjaGl2ZS93ZWIvY2NhbXAvY3VycmVudC9tc2cwMDM1NS5odG1sDQo+IEluZGl2aWR1YWwg cHVibGljYXRpb24gb2YgZHJhZnQtYmVybnN0ZWluLWNjYW1wLXdzb24taW5mby0wMDoNCj4gICAg IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbC1hcmNoaXZlL3dlYi9jY2FtcC9jdXJyZW50L21zZzA5 NTk3Lmh0bWwNCj4NCj4gVGhhbmsgeW91LA0KPiBMb3UgYW5kIERlYm9yYWgNCj4gQ0NBTVAgV0cg Q2hhaXJzDQo+DQo+IC0tLS0tLS0tIE9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UgLS0tLS0tLS0NCj4gU3ViamVj dDogSVBSIERpc2Nsb3N1cmU6IEh1YXdlaSBUZWNobm9sb2dpZXMgQ28uLCAgICAgTHRkJ3MgU3Rh dGVtZW50IGFib3V0DQo+IElQUiByZWxhdGVkIHRvIGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtcndhLWluZm8t MTMNCj4gRGF0ZTogTW9uLCAwOSBKYW4gMjAxMiAwODo0MjoyMSAtMDgwMA0KPiBGcm9tOiBJRVRG IFNlY3JldGFyaWF0IDxpZXRmLWlwckBpZXRmLm9yZz4NCj4gVG86IHlsZWVAaHVhd2VpLmNvbSwg Z3JlZ2JAZ3JvdHRvLW5ldHdvcmtpbmcuY29tLCBkYW5saUBodWF3ZWkuY29tLA0KPiBpbWFqdWt1 LndhdGFydUBsYWIubnR0LmNvLmpwLA0KPiBDQzogc3RicnlhbnRAY2lzY28uY29tLCBhZHJpYW5A b2xkZG9nLmNvLnVrLCBjY2FtcEBpZXRmLm9yZywNCj4gbGJlcmdlckBsYWJuLm5ldCwgICAgIGRi cnVuZ2FyZEBhdHQuY29tLCBpcHItYW5ub3VuY2VAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4NCj4NCj4gRGVhciBZb3Vu ZyBMZWUsIEdyZWcgQmVybnN0ZWluLCBEYW4gTGksIFdhdGFydSBJbWFqdWt1Og0KPg0KPiAgQW4g SVBSIGRpc2Nsb3N1cmUgdGhhdCBwZXJ0YWlucyB0byB5b3VyIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0IGVudGl0 bGVkDQo+ICJSb3V0aW5nIGFuZA0KPiBXYXZlbGVuZ3RoIEFzc2lnbm1lbnQgSW5mb3JtYXRpb24g TW9kZWwgZm9yIFdhdmVsZW5ndGggU3dpdGNoZWQgT3B0aWNhbA0KPiBOZXR3b3JrcyIgKGRyYWZ0 LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtcndhLWluZm8pIHdhcyBzdWJtaXR0ZWQgdG8gdGhlIElFVEYNCj4gU2VjcmV0 YXJpYXQgb24NCj4gMjAxMi0wMS0wOSBhbmQgaGFzIGJlZW4gcG9zdGVkIG9uIHRoZSAiSUVURiBQ YWdlIG9mIEludGVsbGVjdHVhbA0KPiBQcm9wZXJ0eSBSaWdodHMNCj4gRGlzY2xvc3VyZXMiICho dHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2lwci8xNjYyLykuIFRoZSB0aXRsZSBvZiB0aGUg SVBSDQo+IGRpc2Nsb3N1cmUgaXMgIkh1YXdlaSBUZWNobm9sb2dpZXMgQ28uLEx0ZCdzIFN0YXRl bWVudCBhYm91dCBJUFIgcmVsYXRlZCB0bw0KPiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWNjYW1wLXJ3YS1pbmZvLTEz LiIiKTsNCj4NCj4gVGhlIElFVEYgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQNCj4NCj4NCj4NCg0KDQpfX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KQ0NBTVAgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0 DQpDQ0FNUEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9j Y2FtcA== From db3546@att.com Fri Jan 27 06:55:08 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 138D321F853C for