From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 1 08:01:07 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5E553A6A03; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 08:01:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1BD528C442 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 07:09:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ga6hUp4sUy2x for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 07:09:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bay0-omc2-s27.bay0.hotmail.com (bay0-omc2-s27.bay0.hotmail.com [65.54.246.163]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13FC528C43F for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2008 07:09:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BAY137-W48 ([64.4.48.83]) by bay0-omc2-s27.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 1 Aug 2008 07:09:06 -0700 Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [125.20.3.98] From: sutanu kumar To: Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 14:09:05 +0000 Importance: Normal MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Aug 2008 14:09:06.0197 (UTC) FILETIME=[28C03C50:01C8F3E0] Subject: [mpls] regarding rfc 3036: LDP Label Withdraw Message Procedures X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0423586784==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============0423586784== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_feda1845-d5fc-48f2-b468-1208e7d53fc8_" --_feda1845-d5fc-48f2-b468-1208e7d53fc8_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi=2C RFC says "The FEC TLV specifies the FEC for which labels are to be withdraw= n.=0A= If no Label TLV follows the FEC=2C all labels associated with the FEC=0A= are to be withdrawn" What does it mean by "all labels associated with the FEC"? Is it possible t= o map more than one label with a FEC? Thanks=2C Sutanu _________________________________________________________________ Searching for the best deals on travel? Visit MSN Travel. http://msn.coxandkings.co.in/cnk/cnk.do= --_feda1845-d5fc-48f2-b468-1208e7d53fc8_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi=2C

R= FC says "The FEC TLV specifies the FEC for which labels are to be withdrawn= .=0A= If no Label TLV follows the FEC=2C all labels associated with the FEC=0A= are to be withdrawn"

What does it mean by "all labels associated = with the FEC"? Is it possible to map more than one label with a FEC?
Thanks=2C
Sutanu


Do you have a You@live.in id = yet? Get it now. Sign up for a Windows Live ID Try it! = --_feda1845-d5fc-48f2-b468-1208e7d53fc8_-- --===============0423586784== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0423586784==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 3 13:01:42 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4977E28C173; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 13:01:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A045D28C172 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 13:01:39 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L+95WS1ICwHf for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 13:01:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.175]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B1C028C14D for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 13:01:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id y36so630681ugd.46 for ; Sun, 03 Aug 2008 13:02:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:mime-version:content-type; bh=9Ehkgl/U96+Jex54xgb3E5ZvsVL2rATWDOU6vJx3DXo=; b=AKFVw1TPiNTB1yM/DRkWV3Qu5EHEioA3jtSYAowb1L1dbGpbNysU4/ibakC5yHXt20 hRWYBAYeGWvq3X2TGONEnum5Dm4WIu7DjjwmjjkuOWBIwV3OfjLwJdsi5X3iMIYVDNYV aN3JRvajE8LEPNQkyG8SoKu93inSiP63f9tM8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=bZxeFB5H9/gu9kZU6DFVY1mmvhEEEWWrUeKtn6vvI+Vr95MXwJZp9EWwrGwDh1+5AI GpX4yf+8KDsfsf/KGsOtP4UlDFUDeE2mdCBDvZN9LY/RYn9wwUM3hN7AhAvcg7IlS5Ou C2Ey4NKgW1M1YMGqE1YYIe54bwenI291OcwHg= Received: by 10.103.225.2 with SMTP id c2mr5079303mur.93.1217793721069; Sun, 03 Aug 2008 13:02:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.103.246.7 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 13:02:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <715756490808031302y6e67ba6cqa0a9b4c0e3bba20a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 01:32:01 +0530 From: "venkatesan mahalingam" To: waldemar@wdmsys.com, yetik_serbest@labs.att.com, mpls@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [mpls] VPLS terms clarification X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1651059382==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============1651059382== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_18264_4304631.1217793721067" ------=_Part_18264_4304631.1217793721067 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline L2 VPN id, VPLS instance and VSI how these three terms associated/used in VPLS? Can we have more than one VPLS instances in a VSI at AC side? Where L2 VPN id will be useful? How this VSI mapped in VPLS mib? ------=_Part_18264_4304631.1217793721067 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

L2 VPN id, VPLS instance and VSI how these three terms associated/used in VPLS?

Can we have more than one VPLS instances in a VSI at AC side?

Where L2 VPN id will be useful?

How this VSI mapped in VPLS mib?
------=_Part_18264_4304631.1217793721067-- --===============1651059382== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1651059382==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 3 15:11:56 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A2E83A6B2B; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:11:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE77C3A6B2B for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:11:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.729 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.729 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.388, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_RFC_BOGUSMX=1.482, SARE_UNSUB38=0.777] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8NW90Fo1bmTF for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:11:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dog.tcb.net (dog.tcb.net [64.78.150.133]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45A073A6AC1 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:11:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by dog.tcb.net (Postfix, from userid 0) id D8F1C2684EA; Sun, 3 Aug 2008 16:12:20 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmac.castlepoint.net (71-215-75-236.hlrn.qwest.net [71.215.75.236]) (authenticated-user smtp) (TLSv1/SSLv3 AES128-SHA 128/128) by dog.tcb.net with SMTP; Sun, 03 Aug 2008 16:12:20 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from shane@castlepoint.net) X-Avenger: version=0.7.8; receiver=dog.tcb.net; client-ip=71.215.75.236; client-port=4565; syn-fingerprint=65535:55:1:64:M1460,N,W3,N,N,T,S MacOS 10.4.8; data-bytes=0 Message-Id: <74D5B7A5-0CEE-4FFA-AB4C-4C3C04DB0B06@castlepoint.net> From: Shane Amante To: venkatesan mahalingam In-Reply-To: <715756490808031302y6e67ba6cqa0a9b4c0e3bba20a@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v928.1) Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 16:12:04 -0600 References: <715756490808031302y6e67ba6cqa0a9b4c0e3bba20a@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.928.1) Cc: yetik_serbest@labs.att.com, waldemar@wdmsys.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] VPLS terms clarification X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Venkatesan, First, for VPLS-specific questions such as these, it's better that you ask them over on the l2vpn@ietf.org mailing list. To subscribe to this list, please go here: . Second, most of the questions you asked below are probably already addressed within the following docs: - RFC 4664, "Framework for Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks"; and, - draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mib-02, "VPLS MIB". Thanks, -shane On Aug 3, 2008, at 2:02 PM, venkatesan mahalingam wrote: > L2 VPN id, VPLS instance and VSI how these three terms associated/ > used in VPLS? > > Can we have more than one VPLS instances in a VSI at AC side? > > Where L2 VPN id will be useful? > > How this VSI mapped in VPLS mib? > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 5 20:52:03 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFCE23A69CE; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 20:52:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D58DA3A69CE for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 20:52:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.044 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.044 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.555, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kc9smGp5o28u for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 20:52:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 382ED3A68AD for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 20:52:02 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.31,314,1215388800"; d="scan'208";a="136282640" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Aug 2008 03:52:26 +0000 Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m763qQXW019363; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 20:52:26 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m763qQ46004984; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 03:52:26 GMT Received: from xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.174]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 20:52:26 -0700 Received: from sboutros-wxp01.ciswco.com ([10.21.65.89]) by xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 20:52:25 -0700 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 20:52:22 -0700 To: mpls@ietf.org From: Sami Boutros Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2008 03:52:26.0138 (UTC) FILETIME=[D71007A0:01C8F777] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=239; t=1217994746; x=1218858746; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=sboutros@cisco.com; z=From:=20Sami=20Boutros=20 |Subject:=20[mpls]=20draft-boutros-mpls-ldp-gs-adj-00.txt |Sender:=20; bh=ml2NmSb3WO//OxIqe4U626o2/CEKBMPP4riT0ypqF28=; b=jLEtyeuMbbnRs5GBizTEvjHceAGGjjPaWUbd7Mg2pFQAGZL7ebuYa4VO1M utQt+sVKll2q6vvYRC6qtuGs4hEmA76BMKXKAqjeqUNt7ZVQPXjZTWcjs1y0 rupSgo59ew; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=sboutros@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); Cc: "Siva Sivabalan \(msiva\)" , skraza@cisco.com Subject: [mpls] draft-boutros-mpls-ldp-gs-adj-00.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi, The following ID was presented at IETF 72 in Dublin, Please provide input on the ID. We would like to make the ID a work group doc. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-boutros-mpls-ldp-gs-adj-00.txt Thanks, Sami _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 7 09:21:38 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B32B73A6916; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 09:21:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3D483A685C for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 09:21:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.369 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.369 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.630, BAYES_20=-0.74] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v514CBzWq+yM for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 09:21:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.dataconnection.com (smtp.dataconnection.com [192.91.191.4]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB7B628C1A9 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 09:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from enfimail2.datcon.co.uk ([172.18.10.19]) by smtp.dataconnection.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 7 Aug 2008 17:21:46 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 17:21:45 +0100 Message-ID: <8AC1AD08D396174DBC4E6D44EFACCFB1060DA142@enfimail2.datcon.co.uk> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Small bug fix in the P2MP MIB thread-index: Acj4qa8k98c9RNz7Qg+GhpJXNnNzFg== From: "Nic Neate" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Aug 2008 16:21:46.0197 (UTC) FILETIME=[AFC25850:01C8F8A9] Subject: [mpls] Small bug fix in the P2MP MIB X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi all, I'd like to fix what I believe to be a bug in the P2MP MIB. While it has passed WG last call, I don't think it has yet completed AD review, so that should provide a window in which to make this change if people agree with it. The mplsTeP2mpTunnelTable contains three fields for reporting the upstream sub-group IDs received on Path messages for a P2MP LSP. - mplsTeP2mpTunnelSubGroupOriginType - mplsTeP2mpTunnelSubGroupOrigin - mplsTeP2mpTunnelSubGroupID However, an LSR may receive multiple Path messages for a single P2MP LSP, each for a different sub-group. See RFC 4875 section 4.3. I would like to be able to report all of the upstream sub-groups for a P2MP LSP in the MIB, not just one of them. A single S2L sub-LSP will always be in a single Path message and sub-group (except during transient re-optimization conditions). I think the upstream sub-group fields should therefore be moved to the mplsTeP2mpTunnelDestTable, so that the upstream sub-group for each S2L sub-LSP can be reported. The mplsTeP2mpTunnelDestTable already contains fields for the downstream sub-group IDs, so the moved fields would also have to be renamed as follows. - mplsTeP2mpTunnelDestUpSubGroupOriginType - mplsTeP2mpTunnelDestUpSubGroupOrigin - mplsTeP2mpTunnelDestUpSubGroupID Does anyone disagree with that change? Thanks, Nic _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 7 21:35:34 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3172E3A6ABA; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 21:35:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB7F83A6A9D for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 21:35:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E6BBS2Yeroyb for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 21:35:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av9-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (av9-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.186]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE81C3A6ABA for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 21:35:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by av9-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id A3002382A8; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 06:35:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp3-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.102]) by av9-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 520A33828C for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 06:35:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (h133n2fls33o883.telia.com [217.208.62.133]) by smtp3-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A37937E42 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 06:35:21 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <489BCCF8.5060606@pi.nu> Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 06:35:04 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] [Fwd: Please ask your WG...] X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org All, volunteers for NomCom is still needed. /Loa -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Please ask your WG... Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 07:43:22 -0700 (PDT) From: NomCom Chair To: Working Group Chairs To volunteer for the nomcom. The nomcom process is (in my opinion) better served by a large pool of volunteers drawn from a wide spectrum of IETF attendees. As such, please ask on your individual mailing lists for folks to volunteer. Obviously, the exact method for doing so is up to you. The most recent call for volunteers can be reference here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/show_nomcom_message.cgi?id=1617 Whether you copy that message, or reference is probably up to you and the habits of your working group mailing list. If you want to reference or copy the status message I sent out, that can be found at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/show_nomcom_message.cgi?id=1618 Thank you, Joel M. Halpern Nomcom Chair jmh@joelahlpern.com nomcom-chair@ietf.org -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.nu _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 8 03:45:04 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E608C3A6D29; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 03:45:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 82B503A6D29; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 03:45:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20080808104502.82B503A6D29@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 03:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : PathErr Message Triggered MPLS and GMPLS LSP Reroute Author(s) : L. Berger, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2008-08-05 This document describes how Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) PathErr Messages may be used to trigger rerouting of Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) without first removing LSP state or resources. Such LSP rerouting may be desirable in a number of cases including, for example, soft-preemption and graceful shutdown. This document describes the usage of existing Standards Track mechanisms and defines no new formats or mechanisms. It relies on mechanisms already defined as part of RSVP-TE and simply describes a sequence of actions to be executed. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-08-08033101.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 8 04:58:31 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 887BB28C10E; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 04:58:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2F7328C11A for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 04:58:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.67 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.67 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.930, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3zVbhrzWY02G for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 04:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from neo.viciousnest.net (neo.viciousnest.net [192.71.80.124]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F10328C14F for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 04:58:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by neo.viciousnest.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78DB124BF for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 13:58:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from neo.viciousnest.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (neo [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09420-05 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 13:58:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (pat.acreo.se [217.151.195.214]) by neo.viciousnest.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31AE324B8 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 13:58:06 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <489C34C2.7060408@pi.nu> Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 13:57:54 +0200 From: Loa Andersson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------040501080803090909010008" X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at viciousnest.net Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040501080803090909010008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All, as you have seen we have a new wg draft. I made the decision to accept it without polling the list since it is part of the solution for Soft Pre-emption we agreed on in Dublin. Please read and comment on the draft. We don't plan progress any of the drafts that relates to the Soft Pre-emption unless all three is ready to go. /Loa -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 03:45:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org CC: mpls@lists.ietf.org A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : PathErr Message Triggered MPLS and GMPLS LSP Reroute Author(s) : L. Berger, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2008-08-05 This document describes how Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) PathErr Messages may be used to trigger rerouting of Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) without first removing LSP state or resources. Such LSP rerouting may be desirable in a number of cases including, for example, soft-preemption and graceful shutdown. This document describes the usage of existing Standards Track mechanisms and defines no new formats or mechanisms. It relies on mechanisms already defined as part of RSVP-TE and simply describes a sequence of actions to be executed. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.nu --------------040501080803090909010008 Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="draft-ietf-mpls-gmpls-lsp-reroute-00.txt" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-08-08033101.I-D@ietf.org> --------------040501080803090909010008 Content-Type: text/plain; name="Attached Message Part" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Attached Message Part" _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --------------040501080803090909010008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --------------040501080803090909010008-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 8 15:58:22 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C3C33A6B21; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 15:58:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A68A53A6B20 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 15:58:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.11 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s3aeqF+5E+nn for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 15:58:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail44.messagelabs.com (mail44.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.179]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8A633A6950 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 15:58:19 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: nthomson@csc.com X-Msg-Ref: server-11.tower-44.messagelabs.com!1218236294!10406059!1 X-StarScan-Version: 5.5.12.14.2; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [20.137.2.88] Received: (qmail 17386 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2008 22:58:15 -0000 Received: from amer-mta102.csc.com (HELO amer-mta102.csc.com) (20.137.2.88) by server-11.tower-44.messagelabs.com with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 8 Aug 2008 22:58:15 -0000 Received: from amer-gw09.amer.csc.com (amer-gw09.amer.csc.com [20.6.39.245]) by amer-mta102.csc.com (Switch-3.3.2mp/Switch-3.3.0) with ESMTP id m78MwD7o023688 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 18:58:14 -0400 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated From: Neil Thomson To: mpls@ietf.org Message-ID: Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 23:57:05 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on AMER-GW09/SRV/CSC(Release 8.0.1|February 07, 2008) at 08/08/2008 07:01:00 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [mpls] Neil Thomson/GIS/CSC is out of the office. X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org I will be out of the office starting 08/08/2008 and will not return until 18/08/2008. For local site enquiries please contact Dave Brewer (CSC) 0141 957 2589. _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 13 01:58:56 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1C473A685D; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:58:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E2783A67E5 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:58:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.426 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.426 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=3.916, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WeWciMmoUFFN for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:58:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tama500.ecl.ntt.co.jp (tama500.ecl.ntt.co.jp [129.60.39.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9CD03A68C7 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:58:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mfs6.rdh.ecl.ntt.co.jp (mfs6.rdh.ecl.ntt.co.jp [129.60.39.149]) by tama500.ecl.ntt.co.jp (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m7D8weq1000169; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:58:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from mfs6.rdh.ecl.ntt.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mfs6.rdh.ecl.ntt.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACADE65FE; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:58:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from eclscan2.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (eclscan2.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp [129.60.5.68]) by mfs6.rdh.ecl.ntt.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E92165FD; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:58:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from eclscan2.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eclscan2.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7D8weio024659; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:58:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from img.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (img0.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp [129.60.5.145]) by eclscan2.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7D8weGi024656; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:58:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([129.60.13.165]) by img.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7D8wRLB021149; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:58:39 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <48A2A224.2040603@lab.ntt.co.jp> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:58:12 +0900 From: Kenichi AOYAGI User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Harish Sitaraman" , mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] RFC 4561 clarification X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi all, I just started studying MPLS FRR recently and have read RFC 3209 & RFC 4561. I have some questions regarding the interpretation of these standards. As Harish mentioned, it seems the order of in the RRO should be kept as specified by RFC 3209. I think this order should also be kept even when RFC 4561 is also supported (e.g., when the node-id sub-object is pushed onto RRO). Therefore, as Harish mentioned, it is reasonable that the formats: , , and are not allowed. On the other hand, only the formats like , , and are allowed when RFC 3209 and RFC 4561 are supported. However, is indicated as an example of implementation in RFC 4561. Section 3: An implementation may decide to either: 1) Add the node-id sub-object in the RRO carried in an RSVP Resv message and, when required, also add another IPv4/IPv6 sub-object to record interface address. In my understanding, RFC 3209 has not been obsoleted or updated by RFC4561 although it has been updated some other RFCs as quoted below. -------- quote from RFC index ----------- 3209 RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels. D. Awduche, L. Berger, D. Gan, T. Li, V. Srinivasan, G. Swallow. December 2001. (Format: TXT=132264 bytes) (Updated by RFC3936, RFC4420, RFC4874, RFC5151) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD) ----------- end ------------------------- I think it is confusing since the order is not allowed by RFC 3209. Why is the implementation of the pushing the interface-address sub-object onto RRO not mandatory in RFC 4561 while it is mandatory in RFC3209? Has any vendor implemented using format? Any suggestion or comments are appreciated. Regards, - Kenichi On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 11:47:15 -0400 "Harish Sitaraman" wrote: > > Hi, > > Regarding RFC 4561: Definition of RRO Node-Id Sub-Object > > RFC 4561 does not seem to clearly specify certain details regarding the > allowed formats in the RRO and how such information in the RRO could be > parsed by a PLR. > > Would it be possible for somebody to provide some clarifications for the > > following issues ? > -- > > For the purpose of this discussion, we would like to use the following > symbols: > > N = node-id (node-id sub-object) > I = interface-address (IPv4 sub-object) > L = label > | = marker distinguishing information from adjacent nodes > < > = Order of RRO information from a single node > > 1. Section 3 seems to allow various formats in the RRO when adding the > node-id > sub-object. Its not clear whether points (1) and (2) list the set of > formats > that are allowed or if these just serve as examples of certain > formats. > > From interpretation, it seems like the following are allowed: > > Point (1) example: ; , , , N> > > Point (2) example: though the order of the objects is not > specified. > > If , and are allowed, then these are not > compliant > with RFC 3209 since only interface addresses seem to be allowed in > the IPv4 > sub-object and the IPv4 sub-object is pushed after pushing the label. > > Section 4.4.1.1. Subobject 1: IPv4 address: > > IPv4 address > > A 32-bit unicast, host address. Any network-reachable > interface address is allowed here. Illegal addresses, such as > certain loopback addresses, SHOULD NOT be used. > > Section 4.4.3: > > The newly added subobject MUST be this router's IP address. The > address to be added SHOULD be the interface address of the > outgoing > Path messages. If there are multiple addresses to choose from, > the > decision is a local matter. However, it is RECOMMENDED that > the same > address be chosen consistently. > > The Label Record subobject is pushed onto the RECORD_ROUTE > object > prior to pushing on the node's IP address. A node MUST NOT > push on a > Label Record subobject without also pushing on an IPv4 or IPv6 > subobject. > > > RFC 3209 provides clear guidelines regarding the order in which > objects are > pushed on the stack. > > Such stacking guidelines when pushing a node-id sub-object are > required. > > Considering the above (and since RFC 4561 does not update RFC 3209), > it > seems like the following formats should not be allowed: > > , , , > > 2. Section 1 provides the techniques that are used by a PLR in selecting > a > bypass (backup) tunnel. It seems like the description assumes the > existence of a traffic-engineering database and that the IGP-TE > extensions are enabled in the network. > > There are network scenarios where IGP-TE extensions are not enabled, > yet LSPs > are established using the information provided by the IGP. > > This makes it difficult for a PLR to accurately parse the RRO to find > the > MP address depending on the RRO formats added by downstream routers. > The > addresses added by a node can be incorrectly parsed as belonging to > the next node. > > Few examples to illustrate the issue of an upstream node trying to > differentiate > between the formats just by parsing the received RRO: > > | | > and > | > > | > and > | > > | > and > | > > | > and > | > > | > and > | | > > As seen above, its not possible to clearly find the information added > by a > single node since there isn't any delimiter (label ?) in the RRO. > This also > serves to illustrate that allowing formats that include the label in > between > the addresses makes it difficult to parse the RRO. > > Using the traffic-engineering database to validate the addresses in > the above > formats to find the set of addresses that belong to a single node > doesn't work > in the inter-area/AS case (especially for node-protection), assuming > a TE database > exists. > > Thanks, > Harish > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 13 08:05:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4DBA3A69FD; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:05:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA5F3A6B27; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:42:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.442 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.442 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.157, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RMTiduol2zTb; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:42:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A3143A68A1; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:42:45 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,199,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="17304245" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Aug 2008 04:42:38 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7D4gcTD002760; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:42:38 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7D4gcVL002313; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:42:38 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.52]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:42:37 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([171.68.225.134]) by xmb-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:42:37 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) Message-Id: <086CDD1F-B438-4B94-ADF0-6B4A4716EF0B@cisco.com> From: David Ward Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:42:32 -0500 To: idr , l1vpn@ietf.org, ccamp@ietf.org, mpls@ietf.org, isis mailing list , l3vpn@ietf.org, OSPF List , softwires@ietf.org, Yakov Rekhter , Don Fedyk , Hamid Ould-Brahim X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Aug 2008 04:42:37.0608 (UTC) FILETIME=[02EE2280:01C8FCFF] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=335; t=1218602558; x=1219466558; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dward@cisco.com; z=From:=20David=20Ward=20 |Subject:=20BGP=20TE=20attr=20last=20call=20by=20softwires= 20WG |Sender:=20 |To:=20idr=20,=20l1vpn@ietf.org,=20ccamp@ietf .org,=20mpls@ietf.org,=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20isis=20mail ing=20list=20,=20l3vpn@ietf.org,=0A=20=20= 20=20=20=20=20=20OSPF=20List=20,=20softwires@ ietf.org,=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20Yakov=20Rekhter=20,=20Don=20Fedyk=20,=0A=20=2 0=20=20=20=20=20=20Hamid=20Ould-Brahim=20; bh=II3kn8rTaWmsNlBrPvmWFs0wSkjAP6M2lvX8WszGlZY=; b=rHSzKZuTZ1FwrO8N9BVDraHjUnbAg4x9M4zsplv90Za1YSDYDlfoUYBznO c2b0oACONhFzETaFX0Nmvu8pHQgaf3uYEJlm9SR8BVfhlrqK95ZGud3Sckjg ZRtUjQ8AuU; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=dward@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:05:06 -0700 Cc: Alain Durand , David Ward Subject: [mpls] BGP TE attr last call by softwires WG X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org The softwire WG has LC'ed http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te- attribute-01.txt We will keep open an additional two-week period for wider review before moving forward in the publication process. Please have any comments to the authors and softwires WG by Aug 26, 2008. -DWard, Alain Durand _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 13 08:05:09 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C7693A6A24; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:05:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DED3C3A6938; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:48:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.473 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.473 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.126, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rg0iSAKX1rVd; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:48:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59D003A68C3; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:48:43 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,199,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="17304602" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Aug 2008 04:48:46 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7D4mkmv004417; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:48:46 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7D4mkQ3003225; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:48:46 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.52]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:48:46 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([171.68.225.134]) by xmb-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:48:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <086CDD1F-B438-4B94-ADF0-6B4A4716EF0B@cisco.com> References: <086CDD1F-B438-4B94-ADF0-6B4A4716EF0B@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) Message-Id: <3A3FBEE2-A4F7-445B-9A1A-A810F6F9149E@cisco.com> From: David Ward Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:48:40 -0500 To: David Ward , Alain Durand , softwires@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Aug 2008 04:48:45.0702 (UTC) FILETIME=[DE54D260:01C8FCFF] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=459; t=1218602926; x=1219466926; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dward@cisco.com; z=From:=20David=20Ward=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20BGP=20TE=20attr=20last=20call=20by=20so ftwires=20WG |Sender:=20 |To:=20David=20Ward=20,=0A=20=20=20=20=20= 20=20=20Alain=20Durand=20,=2 0softwires@ietf.org; bh=ZCQ7HD046D48EnTqwXuRW1HJM0qCt5A+WytmYiGS+vs=; b=d4xdJzhHZHOi08azvshtyR1JxHj2kAhcNLdGUXzPtPWDiZZ8TwYI8o1txJ MUq9HiOEv1PNf+8wf65CyOiLrXAXZkps0ZxFSON6jH1qIeQ5tYakkFAKt1vK TqBbAfQIST; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=dward@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:05:06 -0700 Cc: Hamid Ould-Brahim Subject: Re: [mpls] BGP TE attr last call by softwires WG X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org The softwire WG has LC'ed http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te- attribute-01.txt We will keep open an additional two-week period for wider review before moving forward in the publication process. Please have any comments to the authors and softwires WG by Aug 26, 2008. -DWard, Alain Durand bcc: l1vpn@ietf.org, ccamp@ietf.org, mpls@ietf.org, idr@ietf.org, isis-wg@ietf.org, l3vpn@ietf.org, ospf@ietf.org _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 14 11:58:17 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D22013A68C7; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:58:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA4313A68A6 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:58:15 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dGsdY3hQyU2N for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:58:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og106.obsmtp.com (exprod7og106.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.165]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C45F73A6861 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:58:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from source ([66.129.228.6]) by exprod7ob106.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:58:15 PDT Received: from emailwf1.jnpr.net ([10.10.2.33]) by p-emsmtp03.jnpr.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:57:58 -0700 Received: from emailwf3.jnpr.net ([10.10.2.45]) by emailwf1.jnpr.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:57:57 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:57:55 -0400 Message-ID: <7A2E2E3FA840D24DBBDCC2CDB92EE96C1DACBE@emailwf3.jnpr.net> In-Reply-To: <1E8ACF422ADD1A458AAFFAD2E6FF70C81A20EA55@proton.jnpr.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] RFC 4561 clarification Thread-Index: AcjyW4pk0woafd8CSfKBxC3sqbw5TgL4VhMg References: <1E8ACF422ADD1A458AAFFAD2E6FF70C81A20EA55@proton.jnpr.net> From: "Harish Sitaraman" To: , "Zafar Ali (zali)" , "Siva Sivabalan (msiva)" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2008 18:57:57.0063 (UTC) FILETIME=[AA1F4570:01C8FE3F] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] RFC 4561 clarification X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi, [Reposting earlier message] Regarding RFC 4561: Definition of RRO Node-Id Sub-Object RFC 4561 does not seem to clearly specify certain details regarding the allowed formats in the RRO and how such information in the RRO could be parsed by a PLR. Would it be possible for the RFC authors to provide some clarifications on the following issues ? -- For the purpose of this discussion, we would like to use the following symbols: N = node-id (node-id sub-object) I = interface-address (IPv4 sub-object) L = label | = marker distinguishing information from adjacent nodes < > = Order of RRO information from a single node 1. Section 3 seems to allow various formats in the RRO when adding the node-id sub-object. Its not clear whether points (1) and (2) list the set of formats that are allowed or if these just serve as examples of certain formats. From interpretation, it seems like the following are allowed: Point (1) example: ; , , , Point (2) example: though the order of the objects is not specified. If , and are allowed, then these are not compliant with RFC 3209 since only interface addresses seem to be allowed in the IPv4 sub-object and the IPv4 sub-object is pushed after pushing the label. Section 4.4.1.1. Subobject 1: IPv4 address: IPv4 address A 32-bit unicast, host address. Any network-reachable interface address is allowed here. Illegal addresses, such as certain loopback addresses, SHOULD NOT be used. Section 4.4.3: The newly added subobject MUST be this router's IP address. The address to be added SHOULD be the interface address of the outgoing Path messages. If there are multiple addresses to choose from, the decision is a local matter. However, it is RECOMMENDED that the same address be chosen consistently. The Label Record subobject is pushed onto the RECORD_ROUTE object prior to pushing on the node's IP address. A node MUST NOT push on a Label Record subobject without also pushing on an IPv4 or IPv6 subobject. RFC 3209 provides clear guidelines regarding the order in which objects are pushed on the stack. Such stacking guidelines when pushing a node-id sub-object are required. Considering the above (and since RFC 4561 does not update RFC 3209), it seems like the following formats should not be allowed: , , , 2. Section 1 provides the techniques that are used by a PLR in selecting a bypass (backup) tunnel. It seems like the description assumes the existence of a traffic-engineering database and that the IGP-TE extensions are enabled in the network. There are network scenarios where IGP-TE extensions are not enabled, yet LSPs are established using the information provided by the IGP. This makes it difficult for a PLR to accurately parse the RRO to find the MP address depending on the RRO formats added by downstream routers. The addresses added by a node can be incorrectly parsed as belonging to the next node. Few examples to illustrate the issue of an upstream node trying to differentiate between the formats just by parsing the received RRO: | | and | | and | | and | | and | | and | | As seen above, its not possible to clearly find the information added by a single node since there isn't any delimiter (label ?) in the RRO. This also serves to illustrate that allowing formats that include the label in between the addresses makes it difficult to parse the RRO. Using the traffic-engineering database to validate the addresses in the above formats to find the set of addresses that belong to a single node doesn't work in the inter-area/AS case (especially for node-protection), assuming a TE database exists. Thanks, Harish _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 14 14:57:51 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F41133A6926; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:57:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 048883A6926; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:57:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -17.111 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.111 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_93=0.6, USER_IN_DEF_WHITELIST=-15] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yw-h0xSMXcwK; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:57:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bosco.isi.edu (bosco.isi.edu [128.9.168.207]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14BC63A6914; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:57:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bosco.isi.edu (Postfix, from userid 70) id D906814E199; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:57:52 -0700 (PDT) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20080814215752.D906814E199@bosco.isi.edu> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Cc: mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [mpls] RFC 5331 on MPLS Upstream Label Assignment and Context-Specific Label Space X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5331 Title: MPLS Upstream Label Assignment and Context-Specific Label Space Author: R. Aggarwal, Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen Status: Standards Track Date: August 2008 Mailbox: rahul@juniper.net, yakov@juniper.net, erosen@cisco.com Pages: 13 Characters: 30779 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-mpls-upstream-label-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5331.txt RFC 3031 limits the MPLS architecture to downstream-assigned MPLS labels. This document introduces the notion of upstream-assigned MPLS labels. It describes the procedures for upstream MPLS label assignment and introduces the concept of a "Context-Specific Label Space". [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 14 14:58:09 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1CE53A6B2B; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:58:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE39D3A6B1A; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:58:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -17.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.102, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_93=0.6, USER_IN_DEF_WHITELIST=-15] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D3QresG0r955; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:58:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bosco.isi.edu (bosco.isi.edu [128.9.168.207]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5F973A6AE1; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:58:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by bosco.isi.edu (Postfix, from userid 70) id DA71914E19B; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:58:10 -0700 (PDT) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20080814215810.DA71914E19B@bosco.isi.edu> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Cc: mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [mpls] RFC 5332 on MPLS Multicast Encapsulations X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5332 Title: MPLS Multicast Encapsulations Author: T. Eckert, E. Rosen, Ed., R. Aggarwal, Y. Rekhter Status: Standards Track Date: August 2008 Mailbox: eckert@cisco.com, erosen@cisco.com, rahul@juniper.net, yakov@juniper.net Pages: 11 Characters: 22887 Updates: RFC3032, RFC4023 I-D Tag: draft-ietf-mpls-multicast-encaps-10.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5332.txt RFC 3032 established two data link layer codepoints for MPLS, used to distinguish whether the data link layer frame is carrying an MPLS unicast or an MPLS multicast packet. However, this usage was never deployed. This specification updates RFC 3032 by redefining the meaning of these two codepoints. Both codepoints can now be used to carry multicast packets. The second codepoint (formerly the "multicast codepoint") is now to be used only on multiaccess media, and it is to mean "the top label of the following label stack is an upstream-assigned label". RFC 3032 does not specify the destination address to be placed in the "MAC DA" (Medium Access Layer Destination Address) field of an ethernet frame that carries an MPLS multicast packet. This document provides that specification. This document updates RFC 3032 and RFC 4023. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 06:00:03 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E230E28C164; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:00:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 966E228C15C; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:00:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20080818130001.966E228C15C@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:00:01 -0700 (PDT) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message Author(s) : J. Vasseur, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt Pages : 8 Date : 2008-08-18 The aim of this document is to describe a common practice with regard to the behavior of a node sending a Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) Traffic Engineering (TE) Path Error message and to the behavior of a node receiving an RSVP Path Error message for a preempted Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering Label Switched Path (TE LSP). This document does not define any new protocol extensions.Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-08-18055710.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 09:21:35 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 318FF28C14A; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:21:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55D383A67AB for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:21:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.548, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_BASE64_BLANKS=0.041, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qPUdDVArhW43 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:21:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 362513A6911 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:21:33 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,229,1217808000"; d="txt'208?scan'208,208";a="17889182" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Aug 2008 16:21:40 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7IGLdt3022335 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:21:39 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7IGLdKg002965 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:21:39 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:21:39 -0400 Received: from 10.61.64.219 ([10.61.64.219]) by xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:21:39 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.12.0.080729 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:21:34 +0200 From: JP Vasseur To: Message-ID: Thread-Topic: I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt Thread-Index: AckBTnsIx1Z/5smWb0GSYuhWMYgmoA== In-Reply-To: <20080818130001.966E228C15C@core3.amsl.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="B_3301928496_26891854" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2008 16:21:39.0651 (UTC) FILETIME=[7E66C130:01C9014E] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2636; t=1219076499; x=1219940499; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jvasseur@cisco.com; z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20 |Subject:=20FW=3A=20I-D=20Action=3Adraft-ietf-mpls-3209-pat herr-03.txt=20 |Sender:=20 |To:=20; bh=MMUJnM4PRMOM1FY0rhAFO1se04ylGw65TLxbEhc4xIk=; b=ET/8lcufjRTZtuApMmG5mEPjKf0z4WLKfn9/d748sXvyPHtkrvX+kUcWAV QOaM+MvUf9HNTcTrTAT///x5LvxMXJ4CxdHUSNpLcLdaISzo2/RG0lG3l12M wuoGa0NfN/; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); Subject: [mpls] FW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3301928496_26891854 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Just a refresh. Thanks. JP. ------ Forwarded Message From: Reply-To: Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:00:01 -0700 (PDT) To: Cc: Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message Author(s) : J. Vasseur, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt Pages : 8 Date : 2008-08-18 The aim of this document is to describe a common practice with regard to the behavior of a node sending a Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) Traffic Engineering (TE) Path Error message and to the behavior of a node receiving an RSVP Path Error message for a preempted Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering Label Switched Path (TE LSP). This document does not define any new protocol extensions.Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt ------ End of Forwarded Message --B_3301928496_26891854 Content-type: application/octet-stream; name="draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt" Content-disposition: attachment; filename="draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-03.txt" Content-transfer-encoding: base64 Q29udGVudC1UeXBlOiB0ZXh0L3BsYWluDUNvbnRlbnQtSUQ6IDwyMDA4LTA4LTE4MDU1NzEw LkktREBpZXRmLm9yZz4NDQ== --B_3301928496_26891854 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --B_3301928496_26891854-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 13:23:33 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59DA3A6D79; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:23:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03CB03A6D79 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:23:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cvE+hOrJ7eG6 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:23:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FFE63A6B59 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:23:30 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,230,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="17958243" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Aug 2008 20:23:37 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7IKNbVw031936 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:23:37 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7IKNb2V001165 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:23:37 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-206.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.32]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:23:37 -0400 Received: from 161.44.113.64 ([161.44.113.64]) by xmb-rtp-206.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.32]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:23:37 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.6.070618 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:23:40 -0400 From: George Swallow To: Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZg== Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2008 20:23:37.0776 (UTC) FILETIME=[4BE0D300:01C90170] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=454; t=1219091017; x=1219955017; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=swallow@cisco.com; z=From:=20George=20Swallow=20 |Subject:=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EXP=20field |Sender:=20 |To:=20; bh=ipgCuzy8U9D5caFrGO7XJ+uQh8svPrOoBodlWBCuWYY=; b=Wr0wPRICe6jf089j2KPoKD8mrI4xqs+7i8bAUg5ZKcChXlYPShdMbnCn6m vzI1WjdXDdOcBPHd/CrgIgCib/+7U2vb6A1L3BdRS/BTqJCgkoTQ7i6kV6qV eClFo0tyba; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=swallow@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on alternatives to the name COS. This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment in a separate message (with a different subject line). ...George _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 13:46:14 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54B5828C210; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:46:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7264428C20A for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:46:12 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w4Gl+GWKHolL for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:46:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 988F83A6D8E for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:46:11 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,230,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="141652764" Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Aug 2008 20:45:41 +0000 Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7IKjfYA029250 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:45:41 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7IKjf1d023454 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:45:41 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-22b.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.112]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:45:40 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:46:30 -0700 Message-ID: <96327EF53EF71A48806DE2DFC034D57F06E5A3C0@xmb-sjc-22b.amer.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgAAyPAA References: From: "Santiago Alvarez (saalvare)" To: "George Swallow (swallow)" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2008 20:45:40.0972 (UTC) FILETIME=[609082C0:01C90173] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=912; t=1219092341; x=1219956341; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=saalvare@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Santiago=20Alvarez=20(saalvare)=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[mpls]=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EX P=20field |Sender:=20; bh=yNa7QpyuH3FFPhVDoUTXlS4syxG0fhh9v8R22poDq4c=; b=f1Ub5ZelDGyncJdBBcosu+n8fTuP2N3XMsxes6dgSRY3iqt4dzCnwVZB5e XLYcQgZ7Hha2r+VPJtGNHBwQUxveySs9mZJtOVu/AKi4FL51DRpiDUZAVBLX ZafOpEIqwU; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=saalvare@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; ); Cc: "Santiago Alvarez \(saalvare\)" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes SA -- > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of George Swallow (swallow) > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 1:24 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 13:55:11 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C9933A6D8E; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:55:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B831B3A6D8E for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:55:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gyegNpDrMZ-d for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:55:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDD6F3A6A90 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:55:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 01666ADAEC; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 22:55:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAB18ADAEB for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 22:55:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 22:55:12 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: mpls@ietf.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [mpls] discussion (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. I hope you meant discussion to be public, so here goes. Personally I like the term "TOS" (from the IP field) better than CoS, because it's hard to differentiate the terms QoS and CoS in spoken english (not that I am a native speaker, but anyway). "Diffserv" is also a better alternative than CoS, if TOS seems out of the question for some reason. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 14:22:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE52F3A6D45; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:22:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29BEB3A6C32 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:22:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.17 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.17 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HpHB8aBfJqEI for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from viefep11-int.chello.at (viefep11-int.chello.at [62.179.121.31]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCA4628C184 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:21:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.17.2] (really [24.132.228.153]) by viefep11-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.7.08.02.02 201-2186-121-104-20070414) with ESMTP id <20080818212146.EIGZ8303.viefep11-int.chello.at@[192.168.17.2]>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 23:21:46 +0200 Message-ID: <48A9E7E9.20704@chello.nl> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 23:21:45 +0200 From: Huub van Helvoort User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: George Swallow References: In-Reply-To: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: hhelvoort@chello.nl List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes. Cheers, Huub. George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > -- ================================================================ Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else... _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 14:27:59 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16F4C3A68E6; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:27:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1EF03A68E6 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:27:58 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8GFrBVj0ljBF for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:27:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DCEA3A68DF for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:27:57 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,230,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="17966091" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Aug 2008 21:28:04 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7ILS47p002095 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:28:04 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7ILS43N022977 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:28:04 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-20b.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.53]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:28:04 -0400 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:28:46 -0400 Message-ID: <15B86BC7352F864BB53A47B540C089B606019FA6@xmb-rtp-20b.amer.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <48A9E7E9.20704@chello.nl> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBeJDW9rug3d9wTDa63L9hLwY2OwAANDkA References: <48A9E7E9.20704@chello.nl> From: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" To: "George Swallow (swallow)" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2008 21:28:04.0433 (UTC) FILETIME=[4C95DC10:01C90179] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1459; t=1219094884; x=1219958884; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=rajiva@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Rajiv=20Asati=20(rajiva)=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[mpls]=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EX P=20field |Sender:=20 |To:=20=22George=20Swallow=20(swallow)=22=20; bh=Canfkv42Jgh40Vr6dJ49rs8LR95dfgzKUfgDp1oUyY0=; b=f2RiwPPbdhuasW/4A4bNMRzCfhk3bn7XBWbYC86rgUGBWP9UM8JyL3CD/q QVKvkgnQwq0BgORTOba0iqWTbCTTBtSbyz8UqH2swAzuXq7xJeX2kdzNUIEI CjegkMJ3TJ; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=rajiva@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes. > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Huub van Helvoort > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 5:22 PM > To: George Swallow (swallow) > Cc: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > Yes. > > Cheers, Huub. > > George Swallow wrote: > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > > alternatives to the name COS. > > > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional comment > > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > > > ...George > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > -- > ================================================================ > Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else... > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 14:55:18 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B8823A6B82; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:55:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904873A6C08 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:55:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.834 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.834 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.699, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fIHIk85lVa+A for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:55:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 241163A6A12 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:55:16 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,230,1217808000"; d="scan'208,217";a="17988071" Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Aug 2008 21:55:21 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7ILtLUN019770; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:55:21 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7ILtLuF000390; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:55:21 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-206.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.32]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:55:21 -0400 Received: from 161.44.113.64 ([161.44.113.64]) by xmb-rtp-206.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.32]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:55:20 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.6.070618 Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:55:23 -0400 From: George Swallow To: Mikael Abrahamsson , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [mpls] discussion (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckBdNQksBh642KQSO2t84SGl7SPdAACEkYK In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2008 21:55:21.0175 (UTC) FILETIME=[1C28DE70:01C9017D] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2714; t=1219096521; x=1219960521; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=swallow@cisco.com; z=From:=20George=20Swallow=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpls]=20discussion=20(was=20Re=3A=20=2 0Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EXP=20field) |Sender:=20 |To:=20Mikael=20Abrahamsson=20,=20; bh=OluQaOvbmaDmJjuVaYc4CQYhtKqgb/oY6U+/HLrKVn4=; b=KOCyosJkvU2YZntn/lLm2rhoLqsIxB+kShnvdjLI1GVZSmZ3CSxjWOi/nU jTpNl3+AgzyVFY/txFL3LtpFXT0VwlEXw8XIdPmKKPPGGBLYQw6FDBEhvOdC xEoD0kcT9/; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=swallow@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); Subject: Re: [mpls] discussion (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1781289017==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --===============1781289017== Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3301926923_5380458" > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3301926923_5380458 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Public of course! On 8/18/08 4:55 PM, "Mikael Abrahamsson" wrote: > On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, George Swallow wrote: > >> > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" >> > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on >> > alternatives to the name COS. > > I hope you meant discussion to be public, so here goes. > > Personally I like the term "TOS" (from the IP field) better than CoS, > because it's hard to differentiate the terms QoS and CoS in spoken english > (not that I am a native speaker, but anyway). "Diffserv" is also a better > alternative than CoS, if TOS seems out of the question for some reason. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > --B_3301926923_5380458 Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [mpls] discussion (was Re:  Poll on renaming of EXP field)<= /TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:14.0px'>Publi= c of course!<BR> <BR> <BR> On 8/18/08 4:55 PM, "Mikael Abrahamsson" <swmike@swm.pp.se>= wrote:<BR> <BR> </SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYL= E=3D'font-size:14.0px'>On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, George Swallow wrote:<BR> <BR> > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to  "C= oS Field"<BR> > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on<BR> > alternatives to the name COS.<BR> <BR> I hope you meant discussion to be public, so here goes.<BR> <BR> Personally I like the term "TOS" (from the IP field) better than = CoS,<BR> because it's hard to differentiate the terms QoS and CoS in spoken english<= BR> (not that I am a native speaker, but anyway). "Diffserv" is also = a better<BR> alternative than CoS, if TOS seems out of the question for some reason.<BR> <BR> --<BR> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se<BR> _______________________________________________<BR> mpls mailing list<BR> mpls@ietf.org<BR> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls<BR> <BR> </SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STY= LE=3D'font-size:14.0px'><BR> </SPAN></FONT> </BODY> </HTML> --B_3301926923_5380458-- --===============1781289017== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1781289017==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 18:21:37 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A26C83A67EC; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:21:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29FE43A67EC for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:21:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.183 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.183 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_RFC_BOGUSMX=1.482] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NyVdbhXkeJgJ for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dog.tcb.net (dog.tcb.net [64.78.150.133]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491223A6765 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by dog.tcb.net (Postfix, from userid 0) id 49F5626866A; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:21:41 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmac.castlepoint.net (71-215-92-55.hlrn.qwest.net [71.215.92.55]) (authenticated-user smtp) (TLSv1/SSLv3 AES128-SHA 128/128) by dog.tcb.net with SMTP; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:21:41 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from shane@castlepoint.net) X-Avenger: version=0.7.8; receiver=dog.tcb.net; client-ip=71.215.92.55; client-port=3424; syn-fingerprint=65535:55:1:64:M1460,N,W3,N,N,T,S MacOS 10.4.8; data-bytes=0 Message-Id: <FE3F07B3-2604-4A1A-A4A2-B26434E9DE96@castlepoint.net> From: Shane Amante <shane@castlepoint.net> To: George Swallow <swallow@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v928.1) Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:21:24 -0600 References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.928.1) Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes. -shane On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:23 PM, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 18:32:54 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A096D3A6A3F; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:32:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6993A69F1 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:32:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ojuMKReMxud1 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:32:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (unknown [119.145.14.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA4C3A6A3F for <mpls@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:32:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K5T00I34QYNX1@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:32:47 +0800 (CST) Received: from c50408 ([10.111.12.79]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0K5T00K6OQYNVN@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:32:47 +0800 (CST) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:32:41 +0800 From: Cao Wei <caowayne@huawei.com> To: George Swallow <swallow@cisco.com>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org> Message-id: <200808190932413545202@huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Foxmail 6, 10, 201, 20 [cn] References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes, Wei Cao On 2008-08-19, at 04:23:38 George Swallow wrote: >During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" >draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on >alternatives to the name COS. > >This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS >is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes >23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > >Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment >in a separate message (with a different subject line). > >...George > >_______________________________________________ >mpls mailing list >mpls@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls Best regards, Cao Wei _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 18 21:32:19 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDCC43A6BEC; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:32:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 156553A6BEC for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:32:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.383 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.383 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.866, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MwGRvbI3+r55 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:32:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.27]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142AB3A6B90 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:32:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRVELSBHS02.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs02.ad2.ad.alcatel.com [155.132.6.74]) by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m7J4WLgA013067; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:32:21 +0200 Received: from FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.51]) by FRVELSBHS02.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:32:21 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:32:38 +0200 Message-ID: <B128F666D4C8BD4FBF56CEAFB2DB66D70315C8DB@FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com> In-Reply-To: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgARE1wQ References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> From: "HENDERICKX Wim" <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.be> To: "George Swallow" <swallow@cisco.com>, <mpls@ietf.org> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 04:32:21.0423 (UTC) FILETIME=[922243F0:01C901B4] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.13 Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org yes -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of George Swallow Sent: maandag 18 augustus 2008 22:24 To: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on alternatives to the name COS. This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment in a separate message (with a different subject line). ...George _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 02:11:39 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8187A3A68E7; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:11:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 263653A682F for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:11:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.739 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.739 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TS98aBJndlyf for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.153]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 730763A6880 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id d23so1724085fga.41 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:11:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=yx/6jeUvTrDSoZRtz38IYmCj5zEnoIHLgRhYZ9kuOiA=; b=Az1UvNxZFEH73ph7CBiX6QUHwyCrS+9e46eahupE+n5/I0GPN1lEAULFECbK8Ptieq vcnyw0umYYw8anjn59hw80Uen4H4y2uAhdnwbKybyuTfFG1nPDpeCIrBvowW4FSoybGc e/yZhkkyzzfXDLL7KkQJRNSJQ9VaAR59JtOGg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=xRjydLJsU8xymwmQ1Nzlk9pB3v7qajM2a+ENFBZT8gtHBEXLyBNYLL95MZ/dQlmvVI RcaX3dMYh1fG2pLQEn8HbXw9Bnjad3aJdJQX643nq3hdMyo25Xx8WVvkQ4+9bSFrJKm9 4zqqVRnHzskCmRZjY7NYX017//zdrJFvB2yO0= Received: by 10.86.97.20 with SMTP id u20mr5431517fgb.15.1219137098917; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:11:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.86.82.20 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:11:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6ca988370808190211y678d93fq312829eb61f7760d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:41:38 +0530 From: "Harshith Shetty" <harsheith@gmail.com> To: mpls@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <B128F666D4C8BD4FBF56CEAFB2DB66D70315C8DB@FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> <B128F666D4C8BD4FBF56CEAFB2DB66D70315C8DB@FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com> Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1754696203==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============1754696203== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2864_3233919.1219137098908" ------=_Part_2864_3233919.1219137098908 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Yes ------=_Part_2864_3233919.1219137098908 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline <div dir="ltr">Yes<br></div> ------=_Part_2864_3233919.1219137098908-- --===============1754696203== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1754696203==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 03:46:28 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4DF43A6894; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 03:46:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B50E3A682E for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 03:46:26 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ky6pBnRuUfAI for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 03:46:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail157.messagelabs.com (mail157.messagelabs.com [85.158.136.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 257453A6894 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 03:46:24 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: jordan.britnell@bell.ca X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-157.messagelabs.com!1219142714!6580172!24 X-StarScan-Version: 5.5.12.14.2; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [206.47.0.173] Received: (qmail 16505 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2008 10:45:55 -0000 Received: from srp004376srs (HELO TLS.Exchange.Bell.ca) (206.47.0.173) by server-2.tower-157.messagelabs.com with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 19 Aug 2008 10:45:55 -0000 Received: from hub02-wyn.bell.corp.bce.ca (142.182.199.50) by dm1c8f.exchange1.bell.ca (198.235.102.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.278.0; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:45:43 -0400 Received: from MBX01.bell.corp.bce.ca ([142.182.199.57]) by hub02-wyn.bell.corp.bce.ca ([142.182.199.50]) with mapi; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:45:42 -0400 From: <jordan.britnell@bell.ca> To: <swallow@cisco.com>, <mpls@ietf.org> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:45:41 -0400 Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBm4c4eJfEnmICTTWYGKZ0bPOVpAATShZw Message-ID: <F626BA5035746548AF2DF3E71FEB52572200F553C8@MBX01.bell.corp.bce.ca> References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> <200808190932413545202@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <200808190932413545202@huawei.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes. ________________________________________ Jordan Britnell IP Technology Research BCE/Bell Canada (416) 215-3729 jordan.britnell@bell.ca -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cao Wei Sent: August 18, 2008 9:33 PM To: George Swallow; mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Yes, Wei Cao On 2008-08-19, at 04:23:38 George Swallow wrote: >During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" >draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on >alternatives to the name COS. > >This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS >is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes >23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > >Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment >in a separate message (with a different subject line). > >...George > >_______________________________________________ >mpls mailing list >mpls@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls Best regards, Cao Wei _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 04:25:44 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 448163A699C; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:25:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50C8B3A6880 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:25:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.244 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.244 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.354, BAYES_00=-2.599, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oSCRLDW8IYFc for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:25:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A70B3A699C for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:25:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K5U00ILCIDXUT@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:25:09 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.1.24]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K5U00MCZIDX3P@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:25:09 +0800 (CST) Received: from j59929 ([10.70.77.69]) by szxml04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0K5U0088SIDVEC@szxml04-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:25:09 +0800 (CST) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:25:03 +0800 From: Jiang Yuan-long <yljiang@huawei.com> To: George Swallow <swallow@cisco.com> Message-id: <00c101c901ee$39751b30$454d460a@china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org yes. ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Swallow" <swallow@cisco.com> To: <mpls@ietf.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:23 AM Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 04:37:25 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6E313A68DA; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:37:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 086CA3A68BD for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:37:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.457 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.457 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.142, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BMQAVrqxtu5z for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [217.115.75.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 911A83A6843 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:37:22 -0700 (PDT) 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 m7JBbPkm005627 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:37:25 +0200 Received: from demuexc023.nsn-intra.net (webmail.nsn-intra.net [10.150.128.36]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7JBbPN7027625; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:37:25 +0200 Received: from DEMUEXC030.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.128.57]) by demuexc023.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:37:25 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:37:22 +0200 Message-ID: <43284B5A95E36B4AB4A91EBA4E0FC31EBBAAE2@DEMUEXC030.nsn-intra.net> In-Reply-To: <00c101c901ee$39751b30$454d460a@china.huawei.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckB78F+kesjFOXEQMSAsGF9kwJDAwAACfjQ References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> <00c101c901ee$39751b30$454d460a@china.huawei.com> From: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" <nurit.sprecher@nsn.com> To: "George Swallow" <swallow@cisco.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 11:37:25.0778 (UTC) FILETIME=[F3E9FF20:01C901EF] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org yes ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Swallow" <swallow@cisco.com> To: <mpls@ietf.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:23 AM Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 05:43:19 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC9A3A69B2; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:43:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3261A3A6811 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:43:17 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vSaT6LLnaZeS for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.235]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BACA3A69B2 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 37so3029697wra.17 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:42:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:date:references:x-mailer; bh=KNqYaTaXeZ6BhE0AER+ervkKZZwyCPo2JWU1WlQRPnU=; b=nGwHn5Cj1czeowNpCL7Yo6C/j2T5pPBhPNjKyXyHRioq1tAIp6MaWmGTxLibgc15xB ir+ALainuPFR/dOPba7M+6HUOSsqXdWiMIHqLXxWv1yPvaJhCNF2Ix8kllQp+aWZm6xV KIGsb/VhaOaRihqnMwUHlTa/B2yvnm7s4dmcs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :x-mailer; b=E+Jxxz/4w9Wyx8qVxJRwjq+l6+yUE75gB6EuffGmv68Rp7rlpjS6AIov+vd0oxVhD7 +0akowZa2HKXa3yb6+KdPC+smmZneUiyyDvKk7OWZMDvvwev0N1cfcSIxO9RFF+gATw1 nj4ymyF4VUJ9AUXXrXElCqKpYzHx/59CWO9LM= Received: by 10.90.117.20 with SMTP id p20mr9576250agc.91.1219149763461; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:42:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Macintosh-2.home ( [96.233.115.97]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q30sm69644wrq.36.2008.08.19.05.42.42 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:42:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <F298FC6F-BADC-4CCA-B731-97D015C4F89A@gmail.com> From: Matthew Meyer <mrminc@gmail.com> To: mpls@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:42:40 -0400 References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926) Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes On Aug 18, 2008, at 4:23 PM, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 06:18:31 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB53728B23E; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:18:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 541D428B23E for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:18:29 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ItpO5GekwP6n for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:18:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp (unknown [IPv6:2001:200:601:12:230:48ff:fe22:3a84]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DF283A6AAB for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:18:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FFD3EC840 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:18:22 +0900 (JST) Received: from platinum.inc.kddilabs.jp (platinum.inc.kddilabs.jp [2001:200:601:1300:172:19:83:254]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 573D9EC833 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:18:22 +0900 (JST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (c019.vpn.kddilabs.jp [172.19.87.19]) by platinum.inc.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06511578111 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:18:18 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <48AAC818.2030007@kddilabs.jp> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:18:16 +0900 From: Tomohiro Otani <otani@kddilabs.jp> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mpls@ietf.org References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org WWVzLAoKUmVnYXJkcywKClRvbW8KCgoKR2VvcmdlIFN3YWxsb3cg44GV44KT44Gv5pu444GN44G+ 44GX44GfOgo+IER1cmluZyB0aGUgbGFzdCBjYWxsIG9uICJFWFAgZmllbGQiIHJlbmFtZWQgdG8g ICJDb1MgRmllbGQiCj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWNvc2ZpZWxkLWRlZi0wNC50eHQsIHRoZXJl IHdlcmUgY29tbWVudHMgb24KPiBhbHRlcm5hdGl2ZXMgdG8gdGhlIG5hbWUgQ09TLgo+Cj4gVGhp cyBtZXNzYWdlIGluaXRpYXRlcyBhIHR3byB3ZWVrIHBvbGwgb24gd2hldGhlciB0aGUgbmFtZSBD T1MKPiBpcyBnb29kIGVub3VnaCwgb3IgaWYgc29tZSBvdGhlciBuYW1lIGlzIG5lZWRlZC4gIFRo ZSBwb2xsIGNsb3Nlcwo+IDIzOjU5IFNlcHQgMSBHTVQuIAo+Cj4gUGxlYXNlIGFuc3dlciB3aXRo IGEgc2ltcGxlIHllcyBvciBuby4gIFlvdSBtYXkgc2VuZCBhbnkgYWRkaXRpb25hbCBjb21tZW50 Cj4gaW4gYSBzZXBhcmF0ZSBtZXNzYWdlICh3aXRoIGEgZGlmZmVyZW50IHN1YmplY3QgbGluZSku Cj4KPiAuLi5HZW9yZ2UKPgo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fCj4gbXBscyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKPiBtcGxzQGlldGYub3JnCj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93 d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9tcGxzCj4KPgo+ICAgCgoKX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KbXBscyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKbXBs c0BpZXRmLm9yZwpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL21wbHMK From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 06:20:34 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2220F28C179; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:20:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8221728C179 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:20:33 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xskNOCKuy4uV for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:20:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.swisscom.com (outmail21.swisscom.com [138.190.32.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 860FB28C111 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:20:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mrp.swissptt.ch; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:20:34 +0200 (MEST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:20:34 +0200 Message-ID: <83C3187535FAC0408E9B03456DDBB3A601CF66D2@sg1492p.corproot.net> In-Reply-To: <00c101c901ee$39751b30$454d460a@china.huawei.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckB7mOvF2AQSes8QAOhNxqxWH8fqAAD+pmQ References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> <00c101c901ee$39751b30$454d460a@china.huawei.com> From: <Santanu.Ganguly@swisscom.com> To: <swallow@cisco.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 13:20:34.0095 (UTC) FILETIME=[5C703BF0:01C901FE] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org yes ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Swallow" <swallow@cisco.com> To: <mpls@ietf.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:23 AM Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 06:50:19 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54AE63A6A72; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:50:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B323A6B40 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:50:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.639 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.639 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZPb+f9kyhltk for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hs-out-0708.google.com (hs-out-0708.google.com [64.233.178.241]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E4123A6B01 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by hs-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id 4so711771hsl.5 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:50:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:cc:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:date:references:x-mailer; bh=SkdMqjexs86SkQabE9K0D1eRzwxo4tyDmictw/rMSyc=; b=W39n9oySKGEr045wS0Ed0yn3ZGLxKG2/spoTjsrKTz/dX5ruzcykJWPkC04NXc7I2W tlqUUE7EXPIfZiQyHd9sCYuUxvFnxYhOnpqALBJlxXuuUPCY8rb/B6Y3YT7J7UK88+dx by7K/dFxPip59sUBSsi/Yc9o42e9fOpIIGi7M= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=cc:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :x-mailer; b=C8jvy1BLDjbZkzP5uyH/Gr7zQArYCC5eMLwJ2MqhPJVS3cNbxoD64MPiBir9FKE9Dq /qhQkXKovLX55q+QrJ2HluNxPHg+JfZ8SX5n10JQKlnicEJg9K56CafqQ6c8OZGMzXPA bUCikG6HWPflJuckJKWwDZSkoOfzz1Vb3jjiw= Received: by 10.100.58.2 with SMTP id g2mr862476ana.6.1219153223359; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:40:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?10.64.29.34? ( [24.248.74.254]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d35sm243207and.8.2008.08.19.06.40.20 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:40:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <597254FD-7AFF-41C9-B078-192E389751F3@gmail.com> From: Phil Bedard <bedard.phil@gmail.com> To: George Swallow <swallow@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v924) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:40:19 -0400 References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.924) Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org yes On Aug 18, 2008, at 4:23 PM, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 07:13:14 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2385428C12C; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:13:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7650B3A6924 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:11:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NteP-rnesAfo for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:11:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail6.alcatel.fr (gc-na5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.5]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F3E63A6900 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:11:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRVELSBHS06.ad2.ad.alcatel.com (frvelsbhs06.ad2.ad.alcatel.com [155.132.6.78]) by smail6.alcatel.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m7J8AKPM002432; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:10:20 +0200 Received: from FRVELSMBS11.ad2.ad.alcatel.com ([155.132.6.37]) by FRVELSBHS06.ad2.ad.alcatel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:10:20 +0200 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:10:18 +0200 Message-ID: <0458D2EE0C36744BABB36BE37805C29A0264AEA8@FRVELSMBS11.ad2.ad.alcatel.com> In-Reply-To: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgAYq+5g References: <C4CF528C.612B%swallow@cisco.com> From: "BOCCI Matthew" <Matthew.Bocci@alcatel-lucent.com> To: "George Swallow" <swallow@cisco.com>, <mpls@ietf.org> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 08:10:20.0870 (UTC) FILETIME=[06177E60:01C901D3] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 155.132.188.84 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:13:13 -0700 Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of George Swallow > Sent: 18 August 2008 21:24 > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name > COS is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional comment in a separate message (with a different > subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 07:13:14 2008 Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC51D28C183; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:13:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F32FD28C163 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:07:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.908, BAYES_40=-0.185, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wCAZWd0DSuZ9 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:07:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp104.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com (smtp104.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com [206.190.36.82]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3ACB928C165 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:07:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 28818 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2008 14:07:27 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=Jqm51ZLkSFJHA7FZ+NuYo65oD0GAbbKC+YIo6NJ7VQ+pkew0Q+NGLs6EokGAZsg6UChDVBJkh2SX7AHiaMDY/h+tV8UPEGW8K9jpgYiCqx4DyxmSjDClGp8KFQxw6t0TyZPEMrJW5F0jwpL91E8mclqzbhsr0BbsZXUF4hXFFrw= ; Received: from unknown (HELO ShahramPC) (davari@rogers.com@99.238.119.231 with login) by smtp104.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 2008 14:07:26 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: O9Zy4IEVM1lqEqhoVj7.oTNmArXewfs7fS2IcnFVEXm3E3WGArBcRvA2GuK2s0qEEg-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: "Shahram Davari" <davari@rogers.com> To: <mpls@ietf.org> References: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0808182251490.12843@uplift.swm.pp.se> <C4CF680B.6166%swallow@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <C4CF680B.6166%swallow@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:07:25 -0400 Message-ID: <00c801c90204$e8a45ba0$b9ed12e0$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AckBdNQksBh642KQSO2t84SGl7SPdAACEkYKACHUHfA= Content-Language: en-ca X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:13:13 -0700 Subject: Re: [mpls] discussion (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/mpls> List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1317876895==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org This is a multipart message in MIME format. --===============1317876895== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00C9_01C901E3.6192BBA0" Content-Language: en-ca This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00C9_01C901E3.6192BBA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I don't really care about the name. But just wanted to mention that CoS is a bit misleading, because for example in L-LSP, the EXP bits are used to indicate the drop precedence and not Class of Service. Even in E-LSP the EXP bits indicate a combination of CoS and drop precedence. My suggestion would be DS filed for (Diffserv). -Shahram From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of George Swallow Sent: August-18-08 5:55 PM To: Mikael Abrahamsson; mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] discussion (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Public of course! On 8/18/08 4:55 PM, "Mikael Abrahamsson" <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote: On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. I hope you meant discussion to be public, so here goes. Personally I like the term "TOS" (from the IP field) better than CoS, because it's hard to differentiate the terms QoS and CoS in spoken english (not that I am a native speaker, but anyway). "Diffserv" is also a better alternative than CoS, if TOS seems out of the question for some reason. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls ------=_NextPart_000_00C9_01C901E3.6192BBA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" = xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" = xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" = xmlns:x=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" = xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" = xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dus-ascii"> <meta name=3DProgId content=3DWord.Document> <meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 12"> <meta name=3DOriginator content=3D"Microsoft Word 12"> <link rel=3DFile-List href=3D"cid:filelist.xml@01C901E3.5EB0D160"> <title>Re: [mpls] discussion (was Re:  Poll on renaming of EXP = field)

I don’t = really care about the name. But just wanted to mention that CoS is a bit misleading, because for example in L-LSP, the EXP bits are used to indicate the drop precedence and not Class of Service. Even in E-LSP the EXP bits indicate = a combination of CoS and drop precedence. My suggestion would be DS filed = for (Diffserv).

 

-Shahram

 

From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf Of George Swallow
Sent: August-18-08 5:55 PM
To: Mikael Abrahamsson; mpls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls] discussion (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP = field)

 

Public of course!


On 8/18/08 4:55 PM, "Mikael Abrahamsson" = <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, George Swallow wrote:

> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to =  "CoS Field"
> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on
> alternatives to the name COS.

I hope you meant discussion to be public, so here goes.

Personally I like the term "TOS" (from the IP field) better = than CoS,
because it's hard to differentiate the terms QoS and CoS in spoken = english
(not that I am a native speaker, but anyway). "Diffserv" is = also a better
alternative than CoS, if TOS seems out of the question for some = reason.

--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

 

------=_NextPart_000_00C9_01C901E3.6192BBA0-- --===============1317876895== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1317876895==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 07:42:26 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD51F3A6938; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:42:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA7813A6A4F for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:42:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.654 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.654 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.055, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iHJjLQQof7Od for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:42:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr2.ericy.com (imr2.ericy.com [198.24.6.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9484B3A69CC for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:42:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw751.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.51]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m7JEgSnL001856; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:29 -0500 Received: from eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.21]) by eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:28 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:26 -0500 Message-ID: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039AFD07@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Question for clarification (was RE: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgAlsH4Q References: From: "Eric Gray" To: "George Swallow" , "Loa Andersson" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 14:42:28.0563 (UTC) FILETIME=[CDB08A30:01C90209] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Question for clarification (was RE: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org George/Loa, I am concerned that we may be signing ourselves up for a slew of RFC revisions/replacements in making this name change. Just to make things clearer - is it the intention that we're creating a single RFC that explains the change and will then be listed as "updating" all RFCs that currently use the term "EXP", or are we in fact signing up to replace a number of RFCs? It's one thing to decide that the field name "CoS" is not worse than the name "EXP"; it is quite another thing to sign up for churning a number of RFCs to replace a term - because it is "nor worse than" the existing term. Another thing to consider is that - even if we plan only to list this new RFC as "updating" all of the RFCs that currently refer to the field name "EXP" - we may be setting a record for the number of RFCs "updated" by a single new RFC. Given the number of people who still refer to RFC 2547 VPNs, it is not all that clear what difference an RFC that proposes to change a field name from "EXP bits" to "CoS bits" will really have. However, if we don't even list this RFC as "updating" these other RFCs, then it is very likely that the new RFC will have even less impact on usage (possibly having no effect what-so-ever over the long run) - since a person reading any of these existing RFCs will have no particular reason to know about this new one. In my opinion, a better use of everybody's time would be to write an RFC that simply explains the way the IETF's use of the term "Experimental" actually works (i.e. - you do not get to pick experimental values, or define symantic meanings for a set of values, for use in the Internet scope without obtaining a specific value (or values) from a number space manager, such as IANA). Such a thing would be quite a reasonable thing to do as a simple process BCP. -- Eric Gray Principal Engineer Ericsson > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of George Swallow > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 07:42:41 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81B0F3A69CC; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:42:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A07C93A6B3D for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:42:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.649 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pQCgxeSzKtZX for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:42:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr1.ericy.com (imr1.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B89623A69CC for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:42:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw750.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.50]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m7JEgj5a010202; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:45 -0500 Received: from eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.21]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:45 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:44 -0500 Message-ID: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039AFD08@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgAmYQAA References: From: "Eric Gray" To: "George Swallow" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 14:42:45.0656 (UTC) FILETIME=[D7E0B980:01C90209] Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No. -- Eric Gray Principal Engineer Ericsson > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of George Swallow > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 08:29:18 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA683A6A14; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:29:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F3C33A6930 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:29:17 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dU9bUXLusyOo for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:29:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (ti-out-0910.google.com [209.85.142.185]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E25323A6904 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:29:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id a6so6401tib.25 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:28:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=RIfFXRpwuBg6ji09kIJeaaTz6F/rMRKsogJI5dlBMMc=; b=vEdBDvoKYrmSD+NG4eRZHmp2cZCo2mydUgkHHo9Rd/irChj1xCi4rSi2KMJMSaO8u6 /1mic+o6X97hHL2twih1iWSGStXttt6O423RF1GNtox2KE9Ydr0co3k2WbV1ay3gOg+X Z1DxKLmaIUmzupHyrF1NzciM5oYJRJfYK7pg8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=IJKeZqK4Km3dMzXN9s8mM7klUySD1xdyYjzZRJBi6pr4wps5Zs0hL6WBZaIgqMOHtb q/74ci455WoEYvv2SXdF9BKVz79nnFP4TUWBijFA/rKTnzjehdmaUnJGQTTWgaCI56R7 hGGNGvRW71LsbFvpdwBKE5yytQtiIfkErG4NE= Received: by 10.110.53.14 with SMTP id b14mr7339659tia.8.1219159727405; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:28:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.110.42.14 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:28:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 20:58:47 +0530 From: "phani bandaru" To: "Eric Gray" In-Reply-To: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039AFD08@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039AFD08@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0284163646==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============0284163646== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_14164_11771807.1219159727398" ------=_Part_14164_11771807.1219159727398 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Yes On 8/19/08, Eric Gray wrote: > > No. > > -- > Eric Gray > Principal Engineer > Ericsson > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of George Swallow > > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM > > To: mpls@ietf.org > > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > > alternatives to the name COS. > > > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > > additional comment > > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > > > ...George > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > -- pUrNamadah pUrNamidam pUrNAt pUrNamudachyate pUrNasya pUrNamAdAya pUrNamevAvashiShyate ------=_Part_14164_11771807.1219159727398 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Yes

On 8/19/08, Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com> wrote:
No.

--
Eric Gray
Principal Engineer
Ericsson

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of George Swallow
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM
> To: mpls@ietf.org
> Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field
>
> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to  "CoS Field"
> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on
> alternatives to the name COS.
>
> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS
> is good enough, or if some other name is needed.  The poll closes
> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT.
>
> Please answer with a simple yes or no.  You may send any
> additional comment
> in a separate message (with a different subject line).
>
> ...George
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls



--
pUrNamadah pUrNamidam
pUrNAt pUrNamudachyate
pUrNasya pUrNamAdAya
pUrNamevAvashiShyate ------=_Part_14164_11771807.1219159727398-- --===============0284163646== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0284163646==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 08:54:06 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C593A6820; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:54:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9557E3A68B1 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:54:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.762 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.762 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.487, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BlhMGk1FwMIh for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:54:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se (mailgw3.ericsson.se [193.180.251.60]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41B0E3A6820 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:54:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 9814420557; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:33:16 +0200 (CEST) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3c-af8d1bb0000015b5-73-48aae7bc5f61 Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.123]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 733752025D; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:33:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw110.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.78]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:33:16 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:32:24 +0200 Message-ID: <0428AC48A879ED46A94F39D5665DF68401AAF6E4@esealmw110.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039AFD07@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Question for clarification (was RE: Poll on renaming of EXPfield) Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgAlsH4QAAJZ9MA= From: "Diego Caviglia" To: "Eric Gray" , "George Swallow" , "Loa Andersson" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 15:33:16.0276 (UTC) FILETIME=[E644A340:01C90210] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Question for clarification (was RE: Poll on renaming of EXPfield) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi all, Seems to me that the Eric proposal is quite good, probably is the ea= siest way to solve this issue. Just my two cents BR D > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Eric Gray > Sent: marted=EC 19 agosto 2008 16.42 > To: George Swallow; Loa Andersson > Cc: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Question for clarification (was RE: Poll on renaming of > EXPfield) > = > George/Loa, > = > I am concerned that we may be signing ourselves up for > a slew of RFC revisions/replacements in making this name > change. > = > Just to make things clearer - is it the intention that > we're creating a single RFC that explains the change and will > then be listed as "updating" all RFCs that currently use the > term "EXP", or are we in fact signing up to replace a number > of RFCs? > = > It's one thing to decide that the field name "CoS" is > not worse than the name "EXP"; it is quite another thing to > sign up for churning a number of RFCs to replace a term - > because it is "nor worse than" the existing term. > = > Another thing to consider is that - even if we plan > only to list this new RFC as "updating" all of the RFCs that > currently refer to the field name "EXP" - we may be setting > a record for the number of RFCs "updated" by a single new > RFC. Given the number of people who still refer to RFC 2547 > VPNs, it is not all that clear what difference an RFC that > proposes to change a field name from "EXP bits" to "CoS bits" > will really have. However, if we don't even list this RFC as > "updating" these other RFCs, then it is very likely that the > new RFC will have even less impact on usage (possibly having > no effect what-so-ever over the long run) - since a person > reading any of these existing RFCs will have no particular > reason to know about this new one. > = > In my opinion, a better use of everybody's time would > be to write an RFC that simply explains the way the IETF's > use of the term "Experimental" actually works (i.e. - you > do not get to pick experimental values, or define symantic > meanings for a set of values, for use in the Internet scope > without obtaining a specific value (or values) from a number > space manager, such as IANA). Such a thing would be quite a > reasonable thing to do as a simple process BCP. > = > -- > Eric Gray > Principal Engineer > Ericsson > = > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of George Swallow > > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM > > To: mpls@ietf.org > > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > > alternatives to the name COS. > > > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > > additional comment > > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > > > ...George > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 09:22:14 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5B2B3A6954; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:22:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05FF83A6A1C for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:22:13 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WrwProd5VC5k for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:22:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F6853A67AF for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:22:12 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,236,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="142312784" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2008 16:21:40 +0000 Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7JGLedZ014903 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:21:40 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7JGLePe019993 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:21:40 GMT Received: from xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.174]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:21:39 -0700 Received: from [144.254.53.136] ([10.21.65.136]) by xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:21:39 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) Message-Id: <265FFDD7-F660-41FB-8A3C-8B5545B9A788@cisco.com> From: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:21:39 +0200 To: George Swallow X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 16:21:39.0882 (UTC) FILETIME=[A8F3C0A0:01C90217] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=689; t=1219162900; x=1220026900; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=flefauch@cisco.com; z=From:=20Francois=20Le=20Faucheur=20IMAP=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpls]=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EX P=20field |Sender:=20; bh=5c+r/E8WxaJb4fh3pQw8A6vqL6nDYnAyjubjDSi+deo=; b=QWeFsTmhkXxOfxGQn6SdxIvb1j7I/D4tTbUBd22Gy1OBS3quP/DzdvGK+u byYfFyXGOTFdV62nMhHzt6nAJipzRgFs+lyL9OsubQhEPjIRayiGf25Zkdnq fE0UTYSiNM; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=flefauch@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Francois Le Faucheur IMAP Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No. Francois On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 09:30:03 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D7553A6C14; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:30:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 72EA63A6909; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:30:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20080819163001.72EA63A6909@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-10.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : A Link-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidth across a link Author(s) : J. Vasseur, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-10.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2008-08-19 Several Link-type sub-TLVs have been defined for OSPF and IS-IS in the context of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) in order to advertise some link characteristics such as the available bandwidth, traffic engineering metric, administrative group and so on. By making statistical assumption about the aggregated traffic carried onto a set of TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs) signalled with zero bandwith (referred to as unconstrained TE LSP in this document), and with the knowledge of the number of unconstrained TE LSPs signalled across a link, algorithms can be designed to load balance (existing or newly configured) unconstrained TE LSP across a set of equal cost paths. This requires knowledge of the number of unconstrained TE LSPs signalled across a link. This document specifies a new Link-type Traffic Engineering sub-TLV used to advertise the number of unconstrained TE LSP(s) signalled across a link. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-10.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-10.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-08-19091632.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 09:30:05 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0165D3A6C44; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:30:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 846AE3A6BAA; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:30:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20080819163001.846AE3A6BAA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-11.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : A Link-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidth across a link Author(s) : J. Vasseur, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-11.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2008-08-19 Several Link-type sub-TLVs have been defined for OSPF and IS-IS in the context of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) in order to advertise some link characteristics such as the available bandwidth, traffic engineering metric, administrative group and so on. By making statistical assumption about the aggregated traffic carried onto a set of TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs) signalled with zero bandwith (referred to as unconstrained TE LSP in this document), and with the knowledge of the number of unconstrained TE LSPs signalled across a link, algorithms can be designed to load balance (existing or newly configured) unconstrained TE LSP across a set of equal cost paths. This requires knowledge of the number of unconstrained TE LSPs signalled across a link. This document specifies a new Link-type Traffic Engineering sub-TLV used to advertise the number of unconstrained TE LSP(s) signalled across a link. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-11.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-11.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-08-19092616.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 09:38:23 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34C83A6C69; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:38:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EDD73A6C55 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:38:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.845 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.845 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.754, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XI-vG1jGOfsx for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:38:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp126.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com (smtp126.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com [206.190.53.31]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 369A128C16E for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:37:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 36838 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2008 16:37:17 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=UOR26cwwLzyKT2WBOMFFEx9TrHArvQmVgILgzNOAXINwW/L/o8xIRljonlVEgH8AUqYcHnJwxfHJfkyHmo3gxuFLW84oaHMc6qWiZvwyia+9z9zXZ12eEMLAiQAEFyh1jnzbZc3hkDehLcksbv2ivmACTawFMubmMFeJW4KqTsM= ; Received: from unknown (HELO ShahramPC) (davari@rogers.com@99.238.119.231 with login) by smtp126.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 2008 16:37:16 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: y9YDfkYVM1k_qGlEkQ9ZQKVu9e8R27S7CHz3y.A20Bd7ya07OH_dT_5_9olC5jCfDw-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: "Shahram Davari" To: References: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039AFD07@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> <0428AC48A879ED46A94F39D5665DF68401AAF6E4@esealmw110.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <0428AC48A879ED46A94F39D5665DF68401AAF6E4@esealmw110.eemea.ericsson.se> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:37:15 -0400 Message-ID: <00f601c90219$d746d030$85d47090$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgAlsH4QAAJZ9MAAAiPwEA== Content-Language: en-ca Subject: Re: [mpls] Question for clarification (was RE: Poll on renaming of EXPfield) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I also agree with Eric. First of all the EXP bits are not only used for CoS but also for Drop Precedence (RFC 3270 proposed standard)) and Explicit Congestion notification (RFC5129 Proposed standard). Also IETF may decide to have other uses for EXP bits in the future. So an RFC that explains this and says that the EXP bits are reserved for IETF use only and explaining that they are not really for experimental purpose is a better approach. Shahram -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Diego Caviglia Sent: August-19-08 11:32 AM To: Eric Gray; George Swallow; Loa Andersson Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Question for clarification (was RE: Poll on renaming of EXPfield) Hi all, Seems to me that the Eric proposal is quite good, probably is the easiest way to solve this issue. Just my two cents BR D > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Eric Gray > Sent: marted=EC 19 agosto 2008 16.42 > To: George Swallow; Loa Andersson > Cc: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Question for clarification (was RE: Poll on renaming of > EXPfield) > = > George/Loa, > = > I am concerned that we may be signing ourselves up for > a slew of RFC revisions/replacements in making this name > change. > = > Just to make things clearer - is it the intention that > we're creating a single RFC that explains the change and will > then be listed as "updating" all RFCs that currently use the > term "EXP", or are we in fact signing up to replace a number > of RFCs? > = > It's one thing to decide that the field name "CoS" is > not worse than the name "EXP"; it is quite another thing to > sign up for churning a number of RFCs to replace a term - > because it is "nor worse than" the existing term. > = > Another thing to consider is that - even if we plan > only to list this new RFC as "updating" all of the RFCs that > currently refer to the field name "EXP" - we may be setting > a record for the number of RFCs "updated" by a single new > RFC. Given the number of people who still refer to RFC 2547 > VPNs, it is not all that clear what difference an RFC that > proposes to change a field name from "EXP bits" to "CoS bits" > will really have. However, if we don't even list this RFC as > "updating" these other RFCs, then it is very likely that the > new RFC will have even less impact on usage (possibly having > no effect what-so-ever over the long run) - since a person > reading any of these existing RFCs will have no particular > reason to know about this new one. > = > In my opinion, a better use of everybody's time would > be to write an RFC that simply explains the way the IETF's > use of the term "Experimental" actually works (i.e. - you > do not get to pick experimental values, or define symantic > meanings for a set of values, for use in the Internet scope > without obtaining a specific value (or values) from a number > space manager, such as IANA). Such a thing would be quite a > reasonable thing to do as a simple process BCP. > = > -- > Eric Gray > Principal Engineer > Ericsson > = > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of George Swallow > > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM > > To: mpls@ietf.org > > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > > alternatives to the name COS. > > > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > > additional comment > > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > > > ...George > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 09:39:14 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 668B63A6D17; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:39:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838CD3A6B2B for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:39:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.503, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 73zmJ7K1Vh4p for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:39:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp111.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com (smtp111.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com [206.190.37.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 375243A6904 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:39:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 37915 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2008 16:38:24 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=srHK1Fu7IcTS7jJr4NkpwqmogLbtjgrLlHpXGpSl9PIE8OHJNxsg4UUJWErr62jzh6jrrPVTQaD/qKWZxecbIORF5S/11cFzBvjQJ6HHZFE3XGN2wLa8h40rJdrLoRB9OrpmOjTu5AJ1OIIA2w8aluiBaNhfRJRjbOhs5xILUQ8= ; Received: from unknown (HELO ShahramPC) (davari@rogers.com@99.238.119.231 with login) by smtp111.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 2008 16:38:20 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: m_S6bPQVM1lE1Uj.QU0I6tWWPdpgbTtnSGD2GOlCjvG6vCKscnlPP6vDjRhbW.ZcNQ-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: "Shahram Davari" To: "'George Swallow'" , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:38:19 -0400 Message-ID: <010701c90219$ff2ff220$fd8fd660$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgAqZm5A Content-Language: en-ca Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No. -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of George Swallow Sent: August-18-08 4:24 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on alternatives to the name COS. This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment in a separate message (with a different subject line). ...George _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 09:42:23 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 858FE3A6B4E; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD77C3A68B1 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:21 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wIwpUj1n92ww for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBC313A6C55 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:42:20 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,236,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="20191233" Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2008 16:41:32 +0000 Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7JGfWuB001176 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:41:32 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7JGfW2b023675 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:41:32 GMT Received: from xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.187]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:41:31 -0700 Received: from [144.254.53.136] ([10.21.65.136]) by xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:41:31 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) Message-Id: From: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:41:33 +0200 To: George Swallow X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 16:41:31.0722 (UTC) FILETIME=[6F581AA0:01C9021A] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1092; t=1219164092; x=1220028092; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=flefauch@cisco.com; z=From:=20Francois=20Le=20Faucheur=20IMAP=20 |Subject:=20=22Traffic=20Management=22=20(was=20Re=3A=20[mp ls]=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EXP=20field) |Sender:=20; bh=MQLncz/3DfMaxafs1zLaMuMAJ36OMoJgmTRQDME52+I=; b=I8QA3dX4ZEU8i2PVCIcdZebn9VsDwrpS70u1BkCYx84CD0wcQcBHLbjwVP VdYmafJRaZpdJUhahqQpiS5WNa8wrVXx4Za+FySM2m93UYVkw4fc/vRdzI9+ 8qAnpTdL2P; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=flefauch@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Francois Le Faucheur IMAP Subject: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi, Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either (or other names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good argument I am missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good enough") than "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both Diffserv and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) Thanks Francois On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 10:06:14 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D2263A6AD3; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:06:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97DDB3A6AD3 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:06:12 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VII2tAekwCLI for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 760EB3A6919 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:06:06 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,236,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="17621003" Received: from ams-dkim-2.cisco.com ([144.254.224.139]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2008 17:05:19 +0000 Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7JH5JP2013036 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:05:19 +0200 Received: from xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-332.cisco.com [144.254.231.87]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7JH5JQO011701 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:05:19 GMT Received: from xmb-ams-33b.cisco.com ([144.254.231.86]) by xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:05:19 +0200 Received: from [10.0.1.195] ([10.61.64.47]) by xmb-ams-33b.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:05:19 +0200 Message-Id: From: Peter Tomsu To: George Swallow In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v928.1) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:05:17 +0200 References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.928.1) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 17:05:19.0155 (UTC) FILETIME=[C2291830:01C9021D] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=671; t=1219165519; x=1220029519; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=ptomsu@cisco.com; z=From:=20Peter=20Tomsu=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpls]=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EX P=20field |Sender:=20; bh=W2ax+kWZDylsZ9UUzHXOq7ub0GYagQlOGLKowjcLjX8=; b=g9BVlV6zU3zu2/u9hp4H1bStCkMSllZXbO3u15JCcwLT+p8vgZtndg31nX kC6OYaG3odYrXVcWzZnedADyAwV/yH1EJp0LH1quSGWFGx5XW462Ayk0RBhy h94RMLy4VC; Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-2; header.From=ptomsu@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim2001 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No On 18.08.2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 10:47:59 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A27F28C175; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:47:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCB8A3A69EA; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:47:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.368 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.368 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.166, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A11MQpv1BBJI; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 749173A67FA; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:47:51 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,236,1217808000"; d="scan'208,217";a="18105463" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2008 17:47:13 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7JHlD2a011232; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:47:13 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7JHlCKh000303; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:47:13 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:47:12 -0400 Received: from 10.61.65.79 ([10.61.65.79]) by xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:47:12 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.12.0.080729 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:47:11 +0200 From: JP Vasseur To: , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: *** Revised ID needed *** Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps (ALink-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic EngineeringLabel Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidthacross a link) to Propose Thread-Index: AckCI5tWSTj5+jnWRUi7LrNoD2vV6A== In-Reply-To: <9B0C4B04-EF62-4971-BF3E-F7A07749F4E5@cisco.com> Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 17:47:12.0855 (UTC) FILETIME=[9C714670:01C90223] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=7757; t=1219168033; x=1220032033; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jvasseur@cisco.com; z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20 |Subject:=20FW=3A=20***=20Revised=20ID=20needed=20***=20Las t=20Call=3A=0A=20draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps=20(ALin k-Type=20sub-TLV=20to=20convey=20the=20number=0A=20of=20Traf fic=20EngineeringLabel=20Switched=20Paths=20signalled=20with =20zero=20reserved=0A=20bandwidthacross=20a=20link)=20to=20P ropose |Sender:=20 |To:=20,=20; bh=dRt87kLRuUedaYKpx8gNReTHSNsjJO/avh+WlcrVtzM=; b=HOlcotn8PePTUZf8bEfu/mw92DJJxPwAF231rpIJXc+znhxMPBfL9ssQf8 q31F7YkDhIbf2ikrtFet+fjxT1AdIsU+Qj4Pe/f8jD2rG9Ak0BUNGQbmr5/q ZG1u93ZOIS; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: [mpls] FW: *** Revised ID needed *** Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps (ALink-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic EngineeringLabel Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidthacross a link) to Propose X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1847973762==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --===============1847973762== Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3302020031_32415617" > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3302020031_32415617 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Dear WGs, We just posted the new revision of draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-11.= t xt=20 The changes takes into account the comment received during WG LCs and are summarized below: >>=20 >>>> =20 >>>> Here are some comments from various lists that I can find on the ISIS >>>> aspects: >>>> =20 >>>> =20 >>>> ----------------------------------- >>>> "Section 1: >>>> =20 >>>> s/Constraint/Constrained >>>> =20 >>>> Section 2 Paragraph 3 First Sentence >>>> =20 >>>> s/assumption/assumptions >>>> =20 >>>> s/unconstrained TE Label Switched Path/unconstrained TE Label Switche= d >>>> Paths >>>> (plural "paths") >>>> =20 >>>> JP> Fixed. >>>> =20 >>>> Section 3 >>>> =20 >>>> As the section is discussing two different sub-TLVs (one for IS-IS an= d >>>> one for OSPF) the first sentence should read: >>>> =20 >>>> "Two Unconstrained TE LSP count sub-TLVs are defined that specify the >>>> =A0=A0 number of TE LSPs signalled with zero bandwidth across a link. >>>> =20 >>>> JP> Fixed. >>>> =20 >>>> Section 3.1 >>>> =20 >>>> It might be worth mentioning that the new sub-TLV could also appear i= n >>>> the MT IS-Neighbor TLV (222) - but I won't insist on it as it is >>>> generally assumed that anything that appears in TLV 22 could also app= ear >>>> in TLV 222. >>>> " >>>> JP> OK I added a reference. >>>> --------------------------------------- >>>> =20 >>>> " >>>> if a link flaps and a substantial number of tunnels are going through >>>> it, these tunnels will be re-routed through other links. This will >>>> trigger flooding of isis lsp's in order to advertise/update the >>>> te-lsp-count subtlv, right ? Do we need to specify anything in order = to >>>> prevent storms ? >>>> " >>>> =20 >>>> This last one is relevant to be addressed w/ some modified text in th= e >>>> draft. More to come as I get it. >>>> =20 >>>> JP> Which is no different than for any other TE-related TLVs. Even wi= th >>>> non-0 bw TE LSPs, if a link flaps they will get rerouted on other link= s, >>>> which will change the reserved bandwidth and will trigger the flooding= of >>>> ISIS LSP or OSPF LSA to reflect the updated reserved bandwidth ? This = is >>>> why we added =B3Similarly to other MPLS Traffic Engineering link >>>> characteristics, LSA/LSP origination trigger mechanisms are outside th= e >>>> scope of this document.=B2 >>>> =20 >>>> That being said, I added the following : =B3care must be given to not >>>> trigger the systematic flooding of a new IS-IS LSP or OSPF LSA with a = too >>>> high granularity in case of change of the number of unconstrained TE L= SPs.=B2 >>>> =20 >>>> JP> Furthermore, I checked IANA actions, all correct. >>>> =20 >>>> -Dward >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks. >>>>=20 >>>> JP. >>>> =20 >>>> =20 >>>> =20 --B_3302020031_32415617 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable FW: *** Revised ID needed *** Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw= -te-lsps (ALink-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic EngineeringLabe= l Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidthacross a link) to Pro= pose Dear WGs,

We just posted the new revision of draft-ietf-mpls-number-0= -bw-te-lsps: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpl= s-number-0-bw-te-lsps-11.txt

The changes takes into account the comment received during WG LCs and are s= ummarized below:


 Here are some comments from various lists that I can find on the ISIS= aspects:
 
 
 -----------------------------------
 "Section 1:
 
 s/Constraint/Constrained
 
 Section 2 Paragraph 3 First Sentence
 
 s/assumption/assumptions
 
 s/unconstrained TE Label Switched Path/unconstrained TE Label Switche= d
 Paths
 (plural "paths")
 
 JP> Fixed.
 
 Section 3
 
 As the section is discussing two different sub-TLVs (one for IS-IS an= d
 one for OSPF) the first sentence should read:
 
 "Two Unconstrained TE LSP count sub-TLVs are defined that specif= y the
 =A0=A0 number of TE LSPs signalled with zero bandwidth across a link.
 
 JP> Fixed.
 
 Section 3.1
 
 It might be worth mentioning that the new sub-TLV could also appear i= n
 the MT IS-Neighbor TLV (222) - but I won't insist on it as it is
 generally assumed that anything that appears in TLV 22 could also app= ear
 in TLV 222.
 "
 JP> OK I added a reference.
 ---------------------------------------
 
 "
 if a link flaps and a substantial number of tunnels are going through=
 it, these tunnels will be re-routed through other links. This will  trigger flooding of isis lsp's in order to advertise/update the
 te-lsp-count subtlv, right ? Do we need to specify anything in order = to
 prevent storms ?
 "
 
 This last one is relevant to be addressed w/ some modified text in th= e draft. More to come as I get it.
 
 JP> Which is no different than for any ot= her TE-related TLVs. Even with non-0 bw TE LSPs, if a link flaps they will g= et rerouted on other links, which will change the reserved bandwidth and wil= l trigger the flooding of ISIS LSP or OSPF LSA to reflect the updated reserv= ed bandwidth ? This is why we added “Similarly to other MPLS Traffic E= ngineering link characteristics, LSA/LSP origination trigger mechanisms are = outside the scope of this document.”
 
 That being said, I added the following : “care must be given to= not trigger the systematic flooding of a new IS-IS LSP or OSPF LSA with a t= oo high granularity in case of change of the number of unconstrained TE LSPs= .”
 
 JP> Furthermore, I checked IANA act= ions, all correct.
 
 -Dward


Thanks.

JP.
 
 
 
= --B_3302020031_32415617-- --===============1847973762== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1847973762==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 10:53:23 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4073A6D48; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65FB63A6D43; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.35 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.35 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.148, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Iy9Vw2zKZ1Yr; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF2A03A6D4B; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:15 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,236,1217808000"; d="scan'208,217";a="18106249" Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2008 17:52:58 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7JHqwRe021202; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:52:58 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7JHqwFB003014; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:52:58 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:52:58 -0400 Received: from 10.61.65.79 ([10.61.65.79]) by xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:52:58 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.12.0.080729 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:52:56 +0200 From: JP Vasseur To: Message-ID: Thread-Topic: *** Revised ID needed *** Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps (ALink-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic EngineeringLabel Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidthacross a link) to Propose Thread-Index: AckCI5tWSTj5+jnWRUi7LrNoD2vV6AAAM2ir In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 17:52:58.0480 (UTC) FILETIME=[6A737700:01C90224] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=8188; t=1219168378; x=1220032378; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jvasseur@cisco.com; z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20***=20Revised=20ID=20needed=20***=20Las t=20Call=3A=0A=20draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps=20(ALin k-Type=20sub-TLV=20to=20convey=20the=20number=0A=20of=20Traf fic=20EngineeringLabel=20Switched=20Paths=20signalled=20with =20zero=20reserved=0A=20bandwidthacross=20a=20link)=20to=20P ropose |Sender:=20 |To:=20; bh=EZ2cJOdeHLIPyS3yKa42TFQozEvqckN8Sfos+j0/42s=; b=lKaUyNn3IZD9WBaPkOe0guE9RTfd9TFxjMHJJ7FHEHPETC9Vc0oIkt2UAj QXxSjx/T8/o4IWutfJIewFunBtknEmr2Uy78j3Q6WaDyvf4EcRh2aHo7AVqa wESvwimWqF; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org, David Ward Subject: Re: [mpls] *** Revised ID needed *** Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps (ALink-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic EngineeringLabel Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidthacross a link) to Propose X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0249799691==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --===============0249799691== Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3302020377_32408957" > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3302020377_32408957 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable On 8/19/08 7:47 PM, "JP Vasseur" wrote: > Dear WGs, >=20 > We just posted the new revision of draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-1= 1.txt >=20 > The changes takes into account the comment received during WG LCs and are > summarized below: >>>=20 >>>>> =20 >>>>> Here are some comments from various lists that I can find on the ISI= S >>>>> aspects: >>>>> =20 >>>>> =20 >>>>> ----------------------------------- >>>>> "Section 1: >>>>> =20 >>>>> s/Constraint/Constrained >>>>> =20 >>>>> Section 2 Paragraph 3 First Sentence >>>>> =20 >>>>> s/assumption/assumptions >>>>> =20 >>>>> s/unconstrained TE Label Switched Path/unconstrained TE Label Switch= ed >>>>> Paths >>>>> (plural "paths") >>>>> =20 >>>>> JP> Fixed. >>>>> =20 >>>>> Section 3 >>>>> =20 >>>>> As the section is discussing two different sub-TLVs (one for IS-IS a= nd >>>>> one for OSPF) the first sentence should read: >>>>> =20 >>>>> "Two Unconstrained TE LSP count sub-TLVs are defined that specify th= e >>>>> =A0=A0 number of TE LSPs signalled with zero bandwidth across a link. >>>>> =20 >>>>> JP> Fixed. >>>>> =20 >>>>> Section 3.1 >>>>> =20 >>>>> It might be worth mentioning that the new sub-TLV could also appear = in >>>>> the MT IS-Neighbor TLV (222) - but I won't insist on it as it is >>>>> generally assumed that anything that appears in TLV 22 could also ap= pear >>>>> in TLV 222. >>>>> " >>>>> JP> OK I added a reference. >>>>> --------------------------------------- >>>>> =20 >>>>> " >>>>> if a link flaps and a substantial number of tunnels are going throug= h >>>>> it, these tunnels will be re-routed through other links. This will >>>>> trigger flooding of isis lsp's in order to advertise/update the >>>>> te-lsp-count subtlv, right ? Do we need to specify anything in order= to >>>>> prevent storms ? >>>>> " >>>>> =20 >>>>> This last one is relevant to be addressed w/ some modified text in t= he >>>>> draft. More to come as I get it. >>>>> =20 >>>>> JP> Which is no different than for any other TE-related TLVs. Even w= ith >>>>> non-0 bw TE LSPs, if a link flaps they will get rerouted on other lin= ks, >>>>> which will change the reserved bandwidth and will trigger the floodin= g of >>>>> ISIS LSP or OSPF LSA to reflect the updated reserved bandwidth ? This= is >>>>> why we added =B3Similarly to other MPLS Traffic Engineering link >>>>> characteristics, LSA/LSP origination trigger mechanisms are outside t= he >>>>> scope of this document.=B2 >>>>> =20 >>>>> That being said, I added the following : =B3care must be given to not >>>>> trigger the systematic flooding of a new IS-IS LSP or OSPF LSA with a= too >>>>> high granularity in case of change of the number of unconstrained TE >>>>> LSPs.=B2 >>>>> =20 >>>>> JP> Furthermore, I checked IANA actions, all correct. >>>>> =20 >>>>> -Dward >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Thanks. >>>>>=20 >>>>> JP. >>>>> =20 >>>>> =20 >>>>> =20 > =20 --B_3302020377_32408957 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: *** Revised ID needed *** Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw= -te-lsps (ALink-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic EngineeringLabe= l Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidthacross a link) to Pro= pose
On 8/19/08 7:47 PM, "JP Vasseur" <jvasseur@cisco.com> wrote:

<= SPAN STYLE=3D'font-size:13pt'>Dear WGs,

We just posted the new revision of draft-ietf-mpls-number-0= -bw-te-lsps: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpl= s-number-0-bw-te-lsps-11.txt

The changes takes into account the comment received during WG LCs and are s= ummarized below:


 Here are some comments from various lists that I can find on the ISIS= aspects:
 
 
 -----------------------------------
 "Section 1:
 
 s/Constraint/Constrained
 
 Section 2 Paragraph 3 First Sentence
 
 s/assumption/assumptions
 
 s/unconstrained TE Label Switched Path/unconstrained TE Label Switche= d
 Paths
 (plural "paths")
 
 JP> Fixed.
 
 Section 3
 
 As the section is discussing two different sub-TLVs (one for IS-IS an= d
 one for OSPF) the first sentence should read:
 
 "Two Unconstrained TE LSP count sub-TLVs are defined that specif= y the
 =A0=A0 number of TE LSPs signalled with zero bandwidth across a link.
 
 JP> Fixed.
 
 Section 3.1
 
 It might be worth mentioning that the new sub-TLV could also appear i= n
 the MT IS-Neighbor TLV (222) - but I won't insist on it as it is
 generally assumed that anything that appears in TLV 22 could also app= ear
 in TLV 222.
 "
 JP> OK I added a reference.
 ---------------------------------------
 
 "
 if a link flaps and a substantial number of tunnels are going through=
 it, these tunnels will be re-routed through other links. This will  trigger flooding of isis lsp's in order to advertise/update the
 te-lsp-count subtlv, right ? Do we need to specify anything in order = to
 prevent storms ?
 "
 
 This last one is relevant to be addressed w/ some modified text in th= e draft. More to come as I get it.
 
 JP> Which is no different than for any ot= her TE-related TLVs. Even with non-0 bw TE LSPs, if a link flaps they will g= et rerouted on other links, which will change the reserved bandwidth and wil= l trigger the flooding of ISIS LSP or OSPF LSA to reflect the updated reserv= ed bandwidth ? This is why we added “Similarly to other MPLS Traffic E= ngineering link characteristics, LSA/LSP origination trigger mechanisms are = outside the scope of this document.”
 
 That being said, I added the following : “care must be given to= not trigger the systematic flooding of a new IS-IS LSP or OSPF LSA with a t= oo high granularity in case of change of the number of unconstrained TE LSPs= .”
 
 JP> Furthermore, I checked IANA act= ions, all correct.
 
 -Dward


Thanks.

JP.
 
 
 

--B_3302020377_32408957-- --===============0249799691== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============0249799691==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 10:54:03 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34B4A3A6D46; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:54:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CA603A6D57 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:54:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.646 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.646 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.047, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CG1B7FrevOgv for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr1.ericy.com (imr1.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60ED03A6827 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw750.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.50]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m7JHrchn015819; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:53:38 -0500 Received: from eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.21]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:53:38 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:53:36 -0500 Message-ID: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B013A@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckCGqBc060xROk6Q/uer+8cFhUVgAABjCcA References: From: "Eric Gray" To: "Francois Le Faucheur IMAP" , "George Swallow" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 17:53:38.0338 (UTC) FILETIME=[82355020:01C90224] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Francois, If I didn't care about the potential for extra work (and possibly confusion as well), I would think "Traffic Management" a better (because more generic) field name than "CoS" - but it is still a change that may have far reaching consequences, and which is better handled by a better explanation of the meaning of the field than by any effort to come up with a better name for it. However, even the field-name "Traffic Management" may not be generic enough. At present, we seem to be agreed that currently defined legitimate uses for the field are all related (at least in a stretch) to something to do with how frames are expected to be handled in forwarding. But - given a precedent established in RFC 3270 (which, among other things, emphasizes that meaning or semantics of the field depends on a common understanding of why an LSP was established) - it is actually clear that the field might mean other things as well. For example, the field might - in some future context - be used to indicate error handling for packets that will be dropped, or macro statistics buckets that individual packets belong to (unrelated to other handling of a packet so marked). In fact, we're re-hashing many of the same arguments that led to the field's being named as it was. So, the issue is all about what constitutes a "legitimate use" - which I would argue is defined by IETF consensus, and is an issue better handled by good explanation than by renaming. -- Eric Gray Principal Engineer Ericsson > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:42 PM > To: George Swallow > Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > Subject: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on > renaming of EXP field) > > Hi, > > Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most > certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either > (or other > names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good > argument I am > missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good enough") > than "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both > Diffserv and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) > > Thanks > > Francois > > > On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > > alternatives to the name COS. > > > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional > > comment > > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > > > ...George > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 11:15:04 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8794228C1E7; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:15:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@lists.ietf.org Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 399603A6CF8; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:15:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20080819181501.399603A6CF8@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:15:01 -0700 (PDT) Cc: mpls@lists.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action:draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-11.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption Author(s) : D. Maddux, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-11.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2008-08-19 This document specifies Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption, a suite of protocol modifications extending the concept of preemption with the goal of reducing/ eliminating traffic disruption of preempted Traffic Engineering Label Switched Paths (TE LSPs). Initially MPLS RSVP-TE was defined supporting only immediate TE LSP displacement upon preemption. The utilization of a reroute request notification helps more gracefully mitigate the re-route process of preempted TE LSP. For the brief period soft preemption is activated, reservations (though not necessarily traffic levels) are in effect under-provisioned until the TE LSP(s) can be re-routed. For this reason, the feature is primarily but not exclusively interesting in MPLS enabled IP networks with Differentiated Services and Traffic Engineering capabilities. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-11.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-11.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-08-19110931.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --NextPart-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 11:31:01 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1160C3A69D1; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:31:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA8E13A69D1 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:30:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.776 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.776 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4DhKZ7p5HWRY for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a2s13.a2hosting.com (a2s13.a2hosting.com [69.39.88.160]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF9693A68DC for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:30:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from adsl-76-208-37-65.dsl.sbndin.sbcglobal.net ([76.208.37.65] helo=[192.168.1.102]) by a2s13.a2hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KVVyL-00055D-8j; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:30:25 -0400 Message-ID: <48AB113C.1080908@alumni.nd.edu> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:30:20 -0400 From: John Kenney User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: George Swallow References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - a2s13.a2hosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - alumni.nd.edu X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 11:32:51 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEF653A68AF; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:32:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED8B33A68AF for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:32:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.521 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.521 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.745, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qG42lkVDQ9SK for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a2s13.a2hosting.com (a2s13.a2hosting.com [69.39.88.160]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 327FB3A685E for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from adsl-76-208-37-65.dsl.sbndin.sbcglobal.net ([76.208.37.65] helo=[192.168.1.102]) by a2s13.a2hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KVVzk-0007ts-3V; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:31:52 -0400 Message-ID: <48AB1194.6000902@alumni.nd.edu> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:31:48 -0400 From: John Kenney User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - a2s13.a2hosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - alumni.nd.edu X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org My "No" vote is a vote in favor of "Traffic Management" Francois Le Faucheur IMAP wrote: > Hi, > > Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most > certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either (or other > names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good argument I am > missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good enough") than > "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both Diffserv > and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) > > Thanks > > Francois > > > On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > >> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" >> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on >> alternatives to the name COS. >> >> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS >> is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes >> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. >> >> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional >> comment >> in a separate message (with a different subject line). >> >> ...George >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 11:39:22 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE5E83A6A6C; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:39:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 791C73A6A6C for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:39:21 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xAyhdv0ONaZ9 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:39:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr1.ericy.com (imr1.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA02D3A685E for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:39:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw751.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.51]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m7JIcgSK013375 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:38:42 -0500 Received: from EUSRCMW722.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.22]) by eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:38:42 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:37:01 -0500 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckCKcfSGekxuRe8Q0G117sMhuVCIwAAMo48 References: <48AB113C.1080908@alumni.nd.edu> From: "Howard Green" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 18:38:42.0776 (UTC) FILETIME=[CE2DCD80:01C9022A] Subject: [mpls] FW: Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 11:40:21 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ABBA3A6AFE; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:40:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A233A6AFE for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:40:20 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oHWihySFIDpu for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:40:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hicks.ciena.com (hicks.ciena.com [63.118.34.22]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85CD13A69E4 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:40:19 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAPSvqkg/dicW/2dsb2JhbAC3BIFY X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:39:50 -0400 Message-ID: <6535C9CED6F87446B41D20EF170F23620E36BF@mamxm01.ciena.com> In-Reply-To: <48AB1194.6000902@alumni.nd.edu> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckCKgvBZ7Ic6TU0QzShPre6GVDj3gAAMK9g From: "Shah, Himanshu" To: "John Kenney" , "Francois Le Faucheur IMAP" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 18:40:04.0866 (UTC) FILETIME=[FF1BBE20:01C9022A] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Ditto. No to CoS, Yes to TM... /himanshu > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of > John Kenney > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:32 PM > To: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > Cc: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of > EXP field) > > > My "No" vote is a vote in favor of "Traffic Management" > > Francois Le Faucheur IMAP wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most > > certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either > (or other > > names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good > argument I am > > missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good > enough") than > > "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both Diffserv > > and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) > > > > Thanks > > > > Francois > > > > > > On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > > > >> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > >> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > >> alternatives to the name COS. > >> > >> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > >> is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > >> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > >> > >> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional > >> comment > >> in a separate message (with a different subject line). > >> > >> ...George > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> mpls mailing list > >> mpls@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 12:14:02 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BBE53A68AE; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:14:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600C23A68AE for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:14:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.723 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.723 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.553, BAYES_40=-0.185, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745, MISSING_HEADERS=1.292] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L7MMDZY+1+rI for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from viefep28-int.chello.at (viefep28-int.chello.at [62.179.121.48]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AD3F3A66B4 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:13:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.17.2] (really [24.132.228.153]) by viefep31-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.7.08.02.02 201-2186-121-104-20070414) with ESMTP id <20080819191233.UAZX12911.viefep31-int.chello.at@[192.168.17.2]> for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:12:33 +0200 Message-ID: <48AB1B20.8020007@chello.nl> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:12:32 +0200 From: Huub van Helvoort User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: mpls@ietf.org References: <6535C9CED6F87446B41D20EF170F23620E36BF@mamxm01.ciena.com> In-Reply-To: <6535C9CED6F87446B41D20EF170F23620E36BF@mamxm01.ciena.com> Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: hhelvoort@chello.nl List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Shakespear already wrote: " What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet " Cos or TMF (Traffic Management Field) or .... Cheers, Huub. ---------------------------------------------- > Ditto. > > No to CoS, Yes to TM... > > /himanshu > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of >> John Kenney >> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:32 PM >> To: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of >> EXP field) >> >> >> My "No" vote is a vote in favor of "Traffic Management" >> >> Francois Le Faucheur IMAP wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most >>> certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either >> (or other >>> names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good >> argument I am >>> missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good >> enough") than >>> "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both Diffserv >>> and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Francois >>> >>> >>> On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: >>> >>>> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" >>>> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on >>>> alternatives to the name COS. >>>> >>>> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS >>>> is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes >>>> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. >>>> >>>> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any >> additional >>>> comment >>>> in a separate message (with a different subject line). >>>> >>>> ...George >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpls mailing list >>>> mpls@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls mailing list >>> mpls@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > -- ================================================================ http://www.van-helvoort.eu/ ================================================================ Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else... _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 12:14:30 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF14028C1FF; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:14:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C20F228C1FF for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:14:29 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q1ALD-cEgwNb for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:14:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38BC828C16D for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:14:28 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,236,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="18116455" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2008 19:12:38 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7JJCcts027987; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:12:38 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7JJCchO005391; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:12:38 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-206.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.32]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:12:38 -0400 Received: from 10.98.32.163 ([10.98.32.163]) by xmb-rtp-206.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.32]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:12:38 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.12.0.080729 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:12:37 -0400 From: George Swallow To: Eric Gray , Francois Le Faucheur IMAP Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckCGqBc060xROk6Q/uer+8cFhUVgAABjCcAAAOubBc= In-Reply-To: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B013A@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 19:12:38.0580 (UTC) FILETIME=[8B9CD740:01C9022F] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=4963; t=1219173158; x=1220037158; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=swallow@cisco.com; z=From:=20George=20Swallow=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpls]=20=22Traffic=20Management=22=20( was=20Re=3A=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EXP=0A=20field) |Sender:=20 |To:=20Eric=20Gray=20,=0A=20=20=20= 20=20=20=20=20Francois=20Le=20Faucheur=20IMAP=20; bh=4lxcFAtUy8Tjqb+tRkRqK56p1YuTcfVOwdn7DfyT+wA=; b=U/T6tEYC7mWuZJbxrWBqx7uZ8r+IbHnbBLuunvOY/2JmwqqEv79mmAPd2S Z9Fy1jb/p6PRk+ojGfO0xAZQ+LhQyDqTmJ527bmzYawQ+yc9SR2GgURtSiE4 yq/nlDwYbJ; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=swallow@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org WG Chair hat on: I think it is important to signal the change by changing the name. Just clarifying the meaning of Experimental may result in a document that does not get read. Further, there is no registry for the EXP bit usage and that usage can vary between LSPs running within the same network. So comparing this to anything that has a registry and a process of IETF consensus does not apply well here. I'm also believe that when this is published as an RFC it will say that it updates the appropriate RFCs. Loa, please correct me if I am wrong. WG Chair hat off: One of the problems here is that every term used in this general space is already over-loaded. Further the emphasis implied by a particular term varies with context (and consequently with the reader's background). For instance the term Traffic Management has very strong connotations for those involved in the ATM Forum. My personal view is that the term CoS is good enough. But I do believe that type of service (ToS) would have been an improvement. It's not that I think "type" is a better term than "class", it is that this would make it the same as the IPv4 header. The ToS field in the IP header now encompasses both the DS codepoint and the ECN codepoint. These are precisely the functions that we are now trying to squeeze into three bits of the MPLS Label Stack Entry. I would argue strongly for this change were it not that in IPv6 the same function is carried in a field called Traffic Class. So CoS takes a little from each of v4 and v6. Good enough. ...George On 8/19/08 1:53 PM, "Eric Gray" wrote: > Francois, > > If I didn't care about the potential for extra work (and > possibly confusion as well), I would think "Traffic Management" > a better (because more generic) field name than "CoS" - but it > is still a change that may have far reaching consequences, and > which is better handled by a better explanation of the meaning > of the field than by any effort to come up with a better name > for it. > > However, even the field-name "Traffic Management" may > not be generic enough. > > At present, we seem to be agreed that currently defined > legitimate uses for the field are all related (at least in a > stretch) to something to do with how frames are expected to be > handled in forwarding. But - given a precedent established in > RFC 3270 (which, among other things, emphasizes that meaning or > semantics of the field depends on a common understanding of why > an LSP was established) - it is actually clear that the field > might mean other things as well. For example, the field might > - in some future context - be used to indicate error handling > for packets that will be dropped, or macro statistics buckets > that individual packets belong to (unrelated to other handling > of a packet so marked). > > In fact, we're re-hashing many of the same arguments that > led to the field's being named as it was. > > So, the issue is all about what constitutes a "legitimate > use" - which I would argue is defined by IETF consensus, and is > an issue better handled by good explanation than by renaming. > > -- > Eric Gray > Principal Engineer > Ericsson > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On >> Behalf Of Francois Le Faucheur IMAP >> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:42 PM >> To: George Swallow >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Francois Le Faucheur IMAP >> Subject: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on >> renaming of EXP field) >> >> Hi, >> >> Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most >> certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either >> (or other >> names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good >> argument I am >> missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good enough") >> than "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both >> Diffserv and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) >> >> Thanks >> >> Francois >> >> >> On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: >> >>> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" >>> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on >>> alternatives to the name COS. >>> >>> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS >>> is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes >>> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. >>> >>> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any >> additional >>> comment >>> in a separate message (with a different subject line). >>> >>> ...George >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls mailing list >>> mpls@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 12:18:48 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B3A28C16D; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:18:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2F223A689F for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:18:47 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Po0l2ilSAE1P for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:18:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zcars04e.nortel.com (zcars04e.nortel.com [47.129.242.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 377FF3A69B7 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:18:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com (zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com [47.129.230.99]) by zcars04e.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id m7JJFxP24449; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:15:59 GMT x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:18:07 -0400 Message-ID: <87AC5F88F03E6249AEA68D40BD3E00BE16831AEB@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> In-Reply-To: <48AB1B20.8020007@chello.nl> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckCL9DXQtXuCQFYQcmUqclohB/ALgAABRfg References: <6535C9CED6F87446B41D20EF170F23620E36BF@mamxm01.ciena.com> <48AB1B20.8020007@chello.nl> From: "David Allan" To: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No to CoS, yes to TMF.... Shakespeare was not an engineer... ;-) D -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Huub van Helvoort Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 3:13 PM Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Shakespear already wrote: " What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet " Cos or TMF (Traffic Management Field) or .... Cheers, Huub. ---------------------------------------------- > Ditto. > > No to CoS, Yes to TM... > > /himanshu > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf >> Of John Kenney >> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:32 PM >> To: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of >> EXP field) >> >> >> My "No" vote is a vote in favor of "Traffic Management" >> >> Francois Le Faucheur IMAP wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most >>> certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either >> (or other >>> names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good >> argument I am >>> missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good >> enough") than >>> "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both Diffserv >>> and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Francois >>> >>> >>> On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: >>> >>>> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" >>>> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on >>>> alternatives to the name COS. >>>> >>>> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is >>>> good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes >>>> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. >>>> >>>> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any >> additional >>>> comment >>>> in a separate message (with a different subject line). >>>> >>>> ...George >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpls mailing list >>>> mpls@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls mailing list >>> mpls@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > -- ================================================================ http://www.van-helvoort.eu/ ================================================================ Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else... _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 12:24:58 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A6C33A6919; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:24:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9A913A6841 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:24:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.156 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.156 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.443, BAYES_05=-1.11, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WD0zyJzYaSrP for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:24:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 190983A6933 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:24:53 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,236,1217808000"; d="scan'208,217";a="18117810" Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2008 19:23:48 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7JJNmXK007620; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:23:48 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7JJNmc7005766; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:23:48 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-206.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.32]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:23:48 -0400 Received: from 10.98.32.163 ([10.98.32.163]) by xmb-rtp-206.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.32]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:23:48 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.12.0.080729 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:23:47 -0400 From: George Swallow To: sutanu kumar , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [mpls] regarding rfc 3036: LDP Label Withdraw Message Procedures Thread-Index: Acjz54Qretzty6wESiKSM49NiZFGhwOSZXYl In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 19:23:48.0846 (UTC) FILETIME=[1B1F50E0:01C90231] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=3104; t=1219173828; x=1220037828; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=swallow@cisco.com; z=From:=20George=20Swallow=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpls]=20regarding=20rfc=203036=3A=20LD P=20Label=20Withdraw=20Message=20Procedures |Sender:=20 |To:=20sutanu=20kumar=20,=20; bh=D3Ro2gVEhfXRMjA9JXRHDpgG098CR37IRidE4jlXdfA=; b=AEWDg0eAexCQzqlIZ2Ob9bJi2xhHcrDw5vPmDRiHBsdN7kBUCwl1acD2yp BO2EQzxGNEY/m+8PJulQ2U7QiOA+1QpGGnF2GH62xGkdO4fLg2wXIhrUHdEA p0Ap27J6ee; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=swallow@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); Subject: Re: [mpls] regarding rfc 3036: LDP Label Withdraw Message Procedures X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1127187494==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --===============1127187494== Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3302004227_253411286" > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3302004227_253411286 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Yes, multiple labels may be mapped to a single FEC. This capability is primarily to support cases where LSP merging cannot be done as in ATM. ...George Ps. You should now be looking at RFC5036 which obsoletes RFC3036. On 8/1/08 10:09 AM, "sutanu kumar" wrote: > Hi, > > RFC says "The FEC TLV specifies the FEC for which labels are to be withdrawn. > If no Label TLV follows the FEC, all labels associated with the FEC are to be > withdrawn" > > What does it mean by "all labels associated with the FEC"? Is it possible to > map more than one label with a FEC? > > Thanks, > Sutanu > > > > Do you have a You@live.in id yet? Get it now. Sign up for a Windows Live ID > Try it! > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --B_3302004227_253411286 Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [mpls] regarding rfc 3036: LDP Label Withdraw Message Procedures= Yes, mu= ltiple labels may be mapped to a single FEC.  This capability is primar= ily to support cases where LSP merging cannot be done as in ATM.

...George

Ps.  You should now be looking at RFC5036 which obsoletes RFC3036.


On 8/1/08 10:09 AM, "sutanu kumar" <sutanu_kumar@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

RFC says "The FEC TLV specifies the FEC for which labels are to be wit= hdrawn. If no Label TLV follows the FEC, all labels associated with the FEC = are to be withdrawn"

What does it mean by "all labels associated with the FEC"? Is it = possible to map more than one label with a FEC?

Thanks,
Sutanu


Do you have a = You@live.in id yet? Get it now. Sign up for a Windows Live ID Try it! &l= t;http://ss1.richmedia.= in/recurl.asp?pid=3D531>
______________________________= _________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/m= ailman/listinfo/mpls
--B_3302004227_253411286-- --===============1127187494== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1127187494==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 13:08:18 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 214DD3A6951; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:08:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C1733A6951 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:08:16 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Uxt-TDSNk8Jg for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:08:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.155]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 412583A67C1 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:08:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id d23so99848fga.41 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:07:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=xOTTC2Hp1C5n1qBK2y6oqNXwqZW2Vn0e/0lRHvNFVxQ=; b=I4NnDeCbnFxoYLcai5Nfi2uv3cGv5ba1+v0Nwaa+9G35xwLsVU2XlKHlQsPyMBBRnT Xj/0Nx1mX5A6iqQVgLXfCEOnBUcEUOkZNsKsoG4Hu54SI/P6X0iQHd3TtyUynDxaiigr +GzbDtFX2BR7wxqTkwsGOrPSHRfyES7/3Uazk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=sEA5U7DOd5rsLqa05uqNVbfEARXPYQsq1/PHIBNyxnR1JprnMZy3tM4w8RzvsaHZdx yOovIHnQx3OrMOavvU3wTBhxVZu/nMOxIeRvw8gYW69jlXddU7gSmd6+h16nw9VxsPME D6/icPaIhBU3KkGvb6P1wJHF/B08rg5dfNGfA= Received: by 10.86.26.11 with SMTP id 11mr5873023fgz.71.1219176462030; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:07:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.86.54.20 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:07:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <406e32c00808191307w6032e120wac0060cee273827b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:07:41 -0400 From: "Peng He" To: "David Allan" In-Reply-To: <87AC5F88F03E6249AEA68D40BD3E00BE16831AEB@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <6535C9CED6F87446B41D20EF170F23620E36BF@mamxm01.ciena.com> <48AB1B20.8020007@chello.nl> <87AC5F88F03E6249AEA68D40BD3E00BE16831AEB@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org 'TMF' looks like the famous "TM Forum", I prefer just "TM".. Regards, Peng On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 3:18 PM, David Allan wrote: > No to CoS, yes to TMF.... > > Shakespeare was not an engineer... ;-) > > D > > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Huub van Helvoort > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 3:13 PM > Cc: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of > EXP field) > > Shakespear already wrote: > " What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would > smell as sweet " > > Cos or TMF (Traffic Management Field) or .... > > Cheers, Huub. > ---------------------------------------------- > >> Ditto. >> >> No to CoS, Yes to TM... >> >> /himanshu >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf >>> Of John Kenney >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:32 PM >>> To: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP >>> Cc: mpls@ietf.org >>> Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of > >>> EXP field) >>> >>> >>> My "No" vote is a vote in favor of "Traffic Management" >>> >>> Francois Le Faucheur IMAP wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most >>>> certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either >>> (or other >>>> names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good >>> argument I am >>>> missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good >>> enough") than >>>> "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both Diffserv >>>> and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> Francois >>>> >>>> >>>> On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: >>>> >>>>> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" >>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on >>>>> alternatives to the name COS. >>>>> >>>>> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is >>>>> good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes >>>>> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. >>>>> >>>>> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any >>> additional >>>>> comment >>>>> in a separate message (with a different subject line). >>>>> >>>>> ...George >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> mpls mailing list >>>>> mpls@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpls mailing list >>>> mpls@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls mailing list >>> mpls@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> > > -- > ================================================================ > http://www.van-helvoort.eu/ > ================================================================ > Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else... > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 13:53:46 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D65F3A6811; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:53:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D253A6811 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:53:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.643 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.643 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.044, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1ctFWFMSeEUN for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:53:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr1.ericy.com (imr1.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 935C93A67C1 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:53:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw750.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.50]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m7JKrFFi027966; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:53:17 -0500 Received: from eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.21]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:53:15 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:53:13 -0500 Message-ID: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B04E1@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckCGqBc060xROk6Q/uer+8cFhUVgAABjCcAAAOubBcAA2Wr4A== References: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B013A@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> From: "Eric Gray" To: "George Swallow" , "Francois Le Faucheur IMAP" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 20:53:15.0853 (UTC) FILETIME=[9A1B97D0:01C9023D] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org George, WRT the use of TM by ATM, it is (as I mentioned at the MPLS meeting) less interesting that "TM" has previously had a different meaning relative to ATM, than it is that "CoS" currently has a different meaning relative to the potential use of MPLS in support of MEF ethernet services. -- Eric Gray Principal Engineer Ericsson > -----Original Message----- > From: George Swallow [mailto:swallow@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 3:13 PM > To: Eric Gray; Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > Cc: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on > renaming of EXP field) > Importance: High > > WG Chair hat on: > > I think it is important to signal the change by changing the > name. Just > clarifying the meaning of Experimental may result in a > document that does > not get read. Further, there is no registry for the EXP bit > usage and that > usage can vary between LSPs running within the same network. > So comparing > this to anything that has a registry and a process of IETF > consensus does > not apply well here. > > I'm also believe that when this is published as an RFC it > will say that it > updates the appropriate RFCs. Loa, please correct me if I am wrong. > > WG Chair hat off: > > One of the problems here is that every term used in this > general space is > already over-loaded. Further the emphasis implied by a > particular term > varies with context (and consequently with the reader's > background). For > instance the term Traffic Management has very strong > connotations for those > involved in the ATM Forum. > > My personal view is that the term CoS is good enough. But I > do believe that > type of service (ToS) would have been an improvement. It's > not that I think > "type" is a better term than "class", it is that this would > make it the same > as the IPv4 header. The ToS field in the IP header now > encompasses both the > DS codepoint and the ECN codepoint. These are precisely the > functions that > we are now trying to squeeze into three bits of the MPLS > Label Stack Entry. > > I would argue strongly for this change were it not that in > IPv6 the same > function is carried in a field called Traffic Class. > > So CoS takes a little from each of v4 and v6. Good enough. > > ...George > > > On 8/19/08 1:53 PM, "Eric Gray" wrote: > > > Francois, > > > > If I didn't care about the potential for extra work (and > > possibly confusion as well), I would think "Traffic Management" > > a better (because more generic) field name than "CoS" - but it > > is still a change that may have far reaching consequences, and > > which is better handled by a better explanation of the meaning > > of the field than by any effort to come up with a better name > > for it. > > > > However, even the field-name "Traffic Management" may > > not be generic enough. > > > > At present, we seem to be agreed that currently defined > > legitimate uses for the field are all related (at least in a > > stretch) to something to do with how frames are expected to be > > handled in forwarding. But - given a precedent established in > > RFC 3270 (which, among other things, emphasizes that meaning or > > semantics of the field depends on a common understanding of why > > an LSP was established) - it is actually clear that the field > > might mean other things as well. For example, the field might > > - in some future context - be used to indicate error handling > > for packets that will be dropped, or macro statistics buckets > > that individual packets belong to (unrelated to other handling > > of a packet so marked). > > > > In fact, we're re-hashing many of the same arguments that > > led to the field's being named as it was. > > > > So, the issue is all about what constitutes a "legitimate > > use" - which I would argue is defined by IETF consensus, and is > > an issue better handled by good explanation than by renaming. > > > > -- > > Eric Gray > > Principal Engineer > > Ericsson > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > >> Behalf Of Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:42 PM > >> To: George Swallow > >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > >> Subject: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on > >> renaming of EXP field) > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most > >> certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either > >> (or other > >> names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good > >> argument I am > >> missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good enough") > >> than "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both > >> Diffserv and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Francois > >> > >> > >> On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > >> > >>> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > >>> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > >>> alternatives to the name COS. > >>> > >>> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > >>> is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > >>> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > >>> > >>> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > >> additional > >>> comment > >>> in a separate message (with a different subject line). > >>> > >>> ...George > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> mpls mailing list > >>> mpls@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> mpls mailing list > >> mpls@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > >> > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 13:58:28 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ABC23A684F; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:58:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 518B43A684F for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:58:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.64 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.64 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.041, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vc2oBFHcWC3m for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr1.ericy.com (imr1.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2A43A6767 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw751.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.51]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m7JKvoZu030348; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:57:50 -0500 Received: from eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.21]) by eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:57:50 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:57:47 -0500 Message-ID: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B0500@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckCGqBc060xROk6Q/uer+8cFhUVgAABjCcAAAOubBcAA4kgwA== References: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B013A@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> From: "Eric Gray" To: "George Swallow" , "Francois Le Faucheur IMAP" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 20:57:50.0013 (UTC) FILETIME=[3D8516D0:01C9023E] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org George, In response to your comment - with chair hat on - the fact that there is no registry has not affected the way we have proceeded (within the IETF) so far. Every use of the EXP bits that we currently consider "legitimate" is defined in an RFC. -- Eric Gray Principal Engineer Ericsson > -----Original Message----- > From: George Swallow [mailto:swallow@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 3:13 PM > To: Eric Gray; Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > Cc: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on > renaming of EXP field) > Importance: High > > WG Chair hat on: > > I think it is important to signal the change by changing the > name. Just > clarifying the meaning of Experimental may result in a > document that does > not get read. Further, there is no registry for the EXP bit > usage and that > usage can vary between LSPs running within the same network. > So comparing > this to anything that has a registry and a process of IETF > consensus does > not apply well here. > > I'm also believe that when this is published as an RFC it > will say that it > updates the appropriate RFCs. Loa, please correct me if I am wrong. > > WG Chair hat off: > > One of the problems here is that every term used in this > general space is > already over-loaded. Further the emphasis implied by a > particular term > varies with context (and consequently with the reader's > background). For > instance the term Traffic Management has very strong > connotations for those > involved in the ATM Forum. > > My personal view is that the term CoS is good enough. But I > do believe that > type of service (ToS) would have been an improvement. It's > not that I think > "type" is a better term than "class", it is that this would > make it the same > as the IPv4 header. The ToS field in the IP header now > encompasses both the > DS codepoint and the ECN codepoint. These are precisely the > functions that > we are now trying to squeeze into three bits of the MPLS > Label Stack Entry. > > I would argue strongly for this change were it not that in > IPv6 the same > function is carried in a field called Traffic Class. > > So CoS takes a little from each of v4 and v6. Good enough. > > ...George > > > On 8/19/08 1:53 PM, "Eric Gray" wrote: > > > Francois, > > > > If I didn't care about the potential for extra work (and > > possibly confusion as well), I would think "Traffic Management" > > a better (because more generic) field name than "CoS" - but it > > is still a change that may have far reaching consequences, and > > which is better handled by a better explanation of the meaning > > of the field than by any effort to come up with a better name > > for it. > > > > However, even the field-name "Traffic Management" may > > not be generic enough. > > > > At present, we seem to be agreed that currently defined > > legitimate uses for the field are all related (at least in a > > stretch) to something to do with how frames are expected to be > > handled in forwarding. But - given a precedent established in > > RFC 3270 (which, among other things, emphasizes that meaning or > > semantics of the field depends on a common understanding of why > > an LSP was established) - it is actually clear that the field > > might mean other things as well. For example, the field might > > - in some future context - be used to indicate error handling > > for packets that will be dropped, or macro statistics buckets > > that individual packets belong to (unrelated to other handling > > of a packet so marked). > > > > In fact, we're re-hashing many of the same arguments that > > led to the field's being named as it was. > > > > So, the issue is all about what constitutes a "legitimate > > use" - which I would argue is defined by IETF consensus, and is > > an issue better handled by good explanation than by renaming. > > > > -- > > Eric Gray > > Principal Engineer > > Ericsson > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > >> Behalf Of Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:42 PM > >> To: George Swallow > >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > >> Subject: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on > >> renaming of EXP field) > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most > >> certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either > >> (or other > >> names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good > >> argument I am > >> missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good enough") > >> than "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both > >> Diffserv and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Francois > >> > >> > >> On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > >> > >>> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > >>> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > >>> alternatives to the name COS. > >>> > >>> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > >>> is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > >>> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > >>> > >>> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > >> additional > >>> comment > >>> in a separate message (with a different subject line). > >>> > >>> ...George > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> mpls mailing list > >>> mpls@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> mpls mailing list > >> mpls@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > >> > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 19:34:28 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0415F3A68D5; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:34:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE353A68D5 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:34:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6iB4D1TQNnwh for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:34:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (unknown [119.145.14.65]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169D03A6780 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:34:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga02-in [172.24.2.6]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K5V005PLOH1HJ@szxga02-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:34:14 +0800 (CST) Received: from M55527 ([10.111.12.94]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0K5V00JVTOH106@szxga02-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:34:13 +0800 (CST) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:34:09 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: George Swallow , mpls@ietf.org Message-id: <6FD81B94179F441D9D42B481B7B44924@M55527> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V12.0.1606 X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 12.0.1606 Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original References: Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No to "Cos" Prefer to "TM" -------------------------------------------------- From: "George Swallow" Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:23 AM To: Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 23:13:50 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A603A67E5; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:13:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 459F03A6780 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:13:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.811 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.811 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.438, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nnENaOycVB9y for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:13:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (mailgw4.ericsson.se [193.180.251.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643093A67E5 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 7313B21118; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:41:43 +0200 (CEST) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3e-aa688bb000007a96-9d-48abae975141 Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.123]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 59A66201F1; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:41:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw110.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.78]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:41:42 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:41:42 +0200 Message-ID: <0428AC48A879ED46A94F39D5665DF684EEAF8F@esealmw110.eemea.ericsson.se> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckCh2z8ZkeABiR2SO2JyNCYStB+Og== From: "Diego Caviglia" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 05:41:42.0848 (UTC) FILETIME=[6CF31400:01C90287] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] R: Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 19 23:15:58 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05A453A69D2; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:15:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CC613A69D2 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:15:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.605 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.605 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RELAY_IS_203=0.994] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q-u5-XJ1BCVB for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:15:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gws04.hcl.in (gws04.mail.hcl.in [203.105.186.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1729B3A69CF for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:15:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gws04.hcl.in (gws04 [10.249.64.135]) by localhost.hcl.in (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F73D360219; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:45:20 +0530 (IST) Received: from chn-egw02-out.corp.hcl.in (unknown [10.249.64.38])by gws04.hcl.in (Postfix) with ESMTPid 9A84436021D; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:45:19 +0530 (IST) Received: from CHN-HCLT-EVS02.HCLT.CORP.HCL.IN ([10.101.26.15]) by chn-egw02-out.corp.hcl.in with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:45:19 +0530 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:44:43 +0530 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6FD81B94179F441D9D42B481B7B44924@M55527> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckCbVchjxqFQhuNSX2dvEY+vCUTnwAHpEOA From: "Vijayanand C" To: "George Swallow" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 06:15:19.0238 (UTC) FILETIME=[1ECFC660:01C9028C] X-imss-version: 2.051 X-imss-result: Passed X-imss-scanInfo: M:T L:E SM:1 X-imss-tmaseResult: TT:1 TS:-16.8567 TC:1F TRN:23 TV:5.5.1026(16106.004) X-imss-scores: Clean:100.00000 C:0 M:0 S:0 R:0 X-imss-settings: Baseline:1 C:1 M:1 S:1 R:1 (0.0000 0.0000) Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "George Swallow" > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:23 AM > To: > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > > alternatives to the name COS. > > > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > > comment > > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > > > ...George > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls DISCLAIMER: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. It shall not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written consent of the author of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender immediately. Before opening any mail and attachments please check them for viruses and defect. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 01:06:08 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE10B3A6A80; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:06:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA9C3A6A6D for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:06:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.807 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.807 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=0.992] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lJsMwPgV+qIS for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mk-outboundfilter-6.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-outboundfilter-6.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.14]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D22463A6A35 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:06:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Trace: 16704300/mk-outboundfilter-6.mail.uk.tiscali.com/PIPEX/$PIPEX-ACCEPTED/pipex-customers/62.188.134.142 X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 62.188.134.142 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkcFAFZtq0g+vIaO/2dsb2JhbABCgwI4h3KqBQOBWA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,238,1217804400"; d="scan'208";a="16704300" X-IP-Direction: IN Received: from 1cust142.tnt5.lnd4.gbr.da.uu.net (HELO allison) ([62.188.134.142]) by smtp.pipex.tiscali.co.uk with SMTP; 20 Aug 2008 09:05:36 +0100 Message-ID: <00ad01c90292$3b13bd80$0601a8c0@allison> From: "Tom Petch" To: "George Swallow" , References: Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:46:32 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Tom Petch List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes Tom Petch ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Swallow" To: Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 10:23 PM Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 01:23:50 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0C563A6A13; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:23:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2AD33A6A13 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:23:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8GuzZQ-jNXz8 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:23:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 575C63A67ED for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:23:47 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,238,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="17672728" Received: from ams-dkim-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.138]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Aug 2008 08:23:54 +0000 Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7K8NsrA023621; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:23:54 +0200 Received: from xbh-ams-331.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-331.cisco.com [144.254.231.71]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7K8NsXn020621; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 08:23:54 GMT Received: from xfe-ams-332.cisco.com ([144.254.231.73]) by xbh-ams-331.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:23:54 +0200 Received: from [10.55.161.195] ([10.55.161.195]) by xfe-ams-332.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:23:53 +0200 In-Reply-To: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B013A@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> References: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B013A@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) Message-Id: From: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:23:51 +0200 To: Eric Gray X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 08:23:53.0781 (UTC) FILETIME=[15099E50:01C9029E] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=4319; t=1219220634; x=1220084634; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim1002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=flefauch@cisco.com; z=From:=20Francois=20Le=20Faucheur=20IMAP=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpls]=20=22Traffic=20Management=22=20( was=20Re=3A=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EXP=20field) |Sender:=20; bh=E3HI3h7bExkNYjJ//ePq0E2Z03tRpmw2M+47cSP5vvI=; b=ki0WlPUQEW8HWxrjG51ve+48r6Brkrd/0hGtY1y39GCu0K5uGuWaqot+uP AVQv5s9VyFGWIQlqa46U4UEHwY2jsLb+ijSsckP3U0xKBj7ewcNzY3qD97jC WUTnaT5qGj; Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-1; header.From=flefauch@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim1002 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Francois Le Faucheur IMAP Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi Eric, On 19 Aug 2008, at 19:53, Eric Gray wrote: > Francois, > > If I didn't care about the potential for extra work (and > possibly confusion as well), I would think "Traffic Management" > a better (because more generic) field name than "CoS" - but it > is still a change that may have far reaching consequences, and > which is better handled by a better explanation of the meaning > of the field than by any effort to come up with a better name > for it. I'm assuming that the document updating the field name would also provide such explanation (ie it can be used for Diffserv as per RFC3270, it can be used for ECN/PCN as per xxx, it may be used in the future for other things that are to be defined in future RFCs...). So those explanation would be there anyways. And I agree with George's point that a name change will help draw attention. > > However, even the field-name "Traffic Management" may > not be generic enough. As I said, I doubt we'll come up with a perfect name that is precise enough to be useful and yet can capture all the yet to be defined use for the field. A name that captures currently understood use and is somewhat generic in order to cope with other applications seems like a reasonable compromise. > > At present, we seem to be agreed that currently defined > legitimate uses for the field are all related (at least in a > stretch) to something to do with how frames are expected to be > handled in forwarding. But - given a precedent established in > RFC 3270 (which, among other things, emphasizes that meaning or > semantics of the field depends on a common understanding of why > an LSP was established) - it is actually clear that the field > might mean other things as well. For example, the field might > - in some future context - be used to indicate error handling > for packets that will be dropped, or macro statistics buckets > that individual packets belong to (unrelated to other handling > of a packet so marked). > > In fact, we're re-hashing many of the same arguments that > led to the field's being named as it was. > > So, the issue is all about what constitutes a "legitimate > use" - which I would argue is defined by IETF consensus, and is > an issue better handled by good explanation than by renaming. I think there is agreement that the actual uses for the field have to be defined by IETF consensus. To me this precisely argues for changing the name of the field as it is clearly not used for experimental purposes in these cases. Francois > > -- > Eric Gray > Principal Engineer > Ericsson > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On >> Behalf Of Francois Le Faucheur IMAP >> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:42 PM >> To: George Swallow >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Francois Le Faucheur IMAP >> Subject: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on >> renaming of EXP field) >> >> Hi, >> >> Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most >> certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either >> (or other >> names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good >> argument I am >> missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good enough") >> than "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both >> Diffserv and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) >> >> Thanks >> >> Francois >> >> >> On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: >> >>> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" >>> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on >>> alternatives to the name COS. >>> >>> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS >>> is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes >>> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. >>> >>> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any >> additional >>> comment >>> in a separate message (with a different subject line). >>> >>> ...George >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls mailing list >>> mpls@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 01:29:36 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C3863A6AA8; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:29:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAF0F3A6AA2 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:29:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OCHim7F-VUAY for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:29:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63E843A6A0D for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:29:33 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,238,1217808000"; d="scan'208,217";a="17673509" Received: from ams-dkim-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.138]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Aug 2008 08:29:40 +0000 Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7K8Terj025541; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:29:40 +0200 Received: from xbh-ams-331.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-331.cisco.com [144.254.231.71]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7K8TeKS022721; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 08:29:40 GMT Received: from xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com ([144.254.231.72]) by xbh-ams-331.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:29:40 +0200 Received: from [10.55.161.195] ([10.55.161.195]) by xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:29:39 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753.1) Message-Id: <4B92EFC9-D015-42FA-9518-157266DF698D@cisco.com> From: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:29:38 +0200 To: George Swallow X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753.1) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 08:29:40.0049 (UTC) FILETIME=[E36DEC10:01C9029E] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2680; t=1219220980; x=1220084980; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim1002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=flefauch@cisco.com; z=From:=20Francois=20Le=20Faucheur=20IMAP=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[mpls]=20=22Traffic=20Management=22=20( was=20Re=3A=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EXP=20field) |Sender:=20; bh=UA2X1aWJsT1b9jzqdWmbss0qQaONfIGkE6xwSCGJJVM=; b=Tv7mESYMH3hk8QpNfSa4bFn8jQAp/9bHU0VzWCRa1dLkvwwu48oty9DR3O yYe5LKKyHDsJH3LTLQfDdvrq5DVApu8WaXKODOvl+ACD8zmBavoh+nuj/KOW HUtHgCd15P; Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-1; header.From=flefauch@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim1002 verified; ); Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Francois Le Faucheur IMAP Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2144914317==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org --===============2144914317== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-7-395609880 --Apple-Mail-7-395609880 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Hi George, > > > WG Chair hat off: > > One of the problems here is that every term used in this general > space is > already over-loaded. Further the emphasis implied by a particular > term > varies with context (and consequently with the reader's > background). For > instance the term Traffic Management has very strong connotations > for those > involved in the ATM Forum. ATM Traffic Management had to do with things like supporting different classes of traffic and providing congestion notification. That does not seem to be such a bad connotation. Francois --Apple-Mail-7-395609880 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi George,



WG Chair hat = off:

One of the problems here is that every term used in = this general space is
already over-loaded.=A0 Further the emphasis implied = by a particular term
varies with context (and = consequently with the reader's background).=A0 For
instance the term Traffic Management has very strong = connotations for those
involved in the ATM = Forum.

ATM Traffic Management had = to do with things like supporting different classes of traffic and = providing congestion notification. That does not seem to be such a bad = connotation.

Francois
= --Apple-Mail-7-395609880-- --===============2144914317== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============2144914317==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 01:31:40 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 703873A6B02; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:31:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD8583A6780 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:31:39 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JV+-HT8S7RhL for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eci-iron1.ecitele.com (eci-iron1.ecitele.com [147.234.242.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB2623A6AF1 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:31:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown (HELO ILPTAM01.ecitele.com) ([147.234.244.44]) by eci-iron1.ecitele.com with ESMTP; 20 Aug 2008 11:36:02 +0300 Received: from ilptexch01.ecitele.com ([172.31.244.40]) by ILPTAM01.ecitele.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:31:41 +0300 Received: from ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com ([147.234.244.212]) by ilptexch01.ecitele.com ([172.31.244.40]) with mapi; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:31:39 +0300 From: Alexander Vainshtein To: George Swallow Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:31:37 +0300 Thread-Topic: Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgBLRxHQ Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 08:31:41.0026 (UTC) FILETIME=[2B898C20:01C9029F] Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No. regards, Sasha > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of George Swallow > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:24 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 01:47:21 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7068F3A6B3F; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:47:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B228B3A6ADB for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:47:19 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 645Whnp3VRg3 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:47:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eci-iron1.ecitele.com (eci-iron1.ecitele.com [147.234.242.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 668933A68A8 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:47:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown (HELO ILPTAM01.ecitele.com) ([147.234.244.44]) by eci-iron1.ecitele.com with ESMTP; 20 Aug 2008 11:51:25 +0300 Received: from ilptexch01.ecitele.com ([172.31.244.40]) by ILPTAM01.ecitele.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:47:04 +0300 Received: from ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com ([147.234.244.212]) by ilptexch01.ecitele.com ([172.31.244.40]) with mapi; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:47:04 +0300 From: Alexander Vainshtein To: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP , George Swallow Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:47:02 +0300 Thread-Topic: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckCGpqvFoeQxCAQQeWdi0h40ajn/wAhKBNw Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 08:47:04.0151 (UTC) FILETIME=[51C33E70:01C902A1] Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi all, My "No" response to the poll question stems from the fact that IMHO the name "CoS" does not reflect at least one of the already approved usages of the EXP field, namely their usage for ECN (see RFC 5129). Incidentally, RFC 5129 is not mentioned in the long list of RFCs that would be updated by draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-nn. The name "Traffic Management" (TM) sounds more suitable to me. But I doubt that changing a name really helps to resolve any problems (Shakespeare has already been quoted in this thread) including the problem of recognition of certain standard bodies as design authorities for specific technologies by the other standard bodies (actually, the problem is *non-recognition*). My 2c. Sasha > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 7:42 PM > To: George Swallow > Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > Subject: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on > renaming of EXP field) > > Hi, > > Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most > certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either (or other > names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good argument I am > missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good enough") > than "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both > Diffserv and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) > > Thanks > > Francois > > > On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > > alternatives to the name COS. > > > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > > comment > > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > > > ...George > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 03:02:23 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11FB23A69F1; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:02:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E075D3A69F1 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:02:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IvAscDurxrt5 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:02:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se (mailgw3.ericsson.se [193.180.251.60]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06F8F3A67EA for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:02:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 21CB420A41 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:02:17 +0200 (CEST) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3c-ac8cbbb0000015b5-d5-48abeba9194f Received: from esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.122]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 0D07E20A22 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:02:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EITRMMW021.eemea.ericsson.se ([141.137.48.176]) by esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:02:16 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:02:15 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckCKcfSGekxuRe8Q0G117sMhuVCIwAAMo48ACAWk5A= From: "Daniele Ceccarelli" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 10:02:16.0758 (UTC) FILETIME=[D37C6D60:01C902AB] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No, Regards Daniele George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 03:17:43 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C3AF3A6B65; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:17:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F26793A6BAE for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:17:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.229 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.229 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.228, BAYES_50=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EoG7rep5uGqW for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:17:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE5383A6AAA for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:17:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id m7KAH3C5011324 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:17:04 +0100 Received: from your029b8cecfe (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7KAH3GY011313 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:17:03 +0100 Message-ID: <03b001c902ad$e3e76400$0300a8c0@your029b8cecfe> From: "Adrian Farrel" To: References: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B013A@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:14:15 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Subject: [mpls] Discuss of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Adrian Farrel List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I'm finally tempted out of my cave to join in this cycle-burning extravaganza. I just want to point out that marking a new RFC as "Updates" a whole series of other RFCs has only limited effect on how those other RFCs are read. Thus, *if* the reader collects the older RFC from the RFC repository (http://www.ietf.org/iesg/1rfc_index.txt) or from the MPLS charter page (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mpls-charter.html) they will see a note saying something like "updated by RFC wxyz". The wise reader will get a copy of that newer RFC to find out what the update is. But most RFC reading comes direct. I need to know about LDP; I get RFC 5036 and read it. And the RFC itself carries no indication that it has been updated. The effect of this in our particular case is that changing the name of a field in a new RFC will have only limited affect on how people perceive the name of that field. - they will continue to read the old RFCs - they will continue to read the many books that are out there - they might not even read the new RFC as it seems uninteresting from its title. We could use the RFC eratum system, but frankly, hardly anyone ever looks at that. A slightly more sure way to drive the message home would be to respin all of the updated RFCs with the correct (new) naming of the bits. This is what most publishing organisations would do. Of course, we only mark the old RFCs as obsoleted in exactly the same way as we mark them as updated. This means that they are still around and still easy to pick up and read (witness the recent email on the list about RFC 3036). So... All this effort and what effect? There now. I, too, have wasted my time on this thread. Adrian _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 03:27:37 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0AC3A68B9; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:27:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0B73A67AA for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:27:36 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rUGxfQU2R7jb for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:27:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eci-iron1.ecitele.com (eci-iron1.ecitele.com [147.234.242.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B80D03A6B53 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:27:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown (HELO ILPTAM01.ecitele.com) ([147.234.244.44]) by eci-iron1.ecitele.com with ESMTP; 20 Aug 2008 13:31:43 +0300 Received: from ilptexch01.ecitele.com ([172.31.244.40]) by ILPTAM01.ecitele.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:27:21 +0300 Received: from ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com ([147.234.244.212]) by ilptexch01.ecitele.com ([172.31.244.40]) with mapi; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:27:21 +0300 From: Alexander Vainshtein To: Adrian Farrel Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:27:19 +0300 Thread-Topic: [mpls] Discuss of EXP field Thread-Index: AckCrggPI52V1XdxQJadtprxJD68MgAAEExg Message-ID: References: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B013A@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> <03b001c902ad$e3e76400$0300a8c0@your029b8cecfe> In-Reply-To: <03b001c902ad$e3e76400$0300a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 10:27:21.0663 (UTC) FILETIME=[547AB4F0:01C902AF] Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Discuss of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Adrian (and all), A brief comment (supporting your view) inline below... Regards, Sasha > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 1:14 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Discuss of EXP field > > Hi, > > I'm finally tempted out of my cave to join in this cycle-burning > extravaganza. > > I just want to point out that marking a new RFC as "Updates" > a whole series > of other RFCs has only limited effect on how those other RFCs > are read. > > Thus, *if* the reader collects the older RFC from the RFC repository > (http://www.ietf.org/iesg/1rfc_index.txt) or from the MPLS > charter page > (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mpls-charter.html) they > will see a note > saying something like "updated by RFC wxyz". The wise reader > will get a copy > of that newer RFC to find out what the update is. > > But most RFC reading comes direct. I need to know about LDP; > I get RFC 5036 > and read it. And the RFC itself carries no indication that it has been > updated. > > The effect of this in our particular case is that changing > the name of a > field in a new RFC will have only limited affect on how > people perceive the > name of that field. > - they will continue to read the old RFCs > - they will continue to read the many books that are out there > [Sasha] Not to mention tons of technical documents that are freely available as Web pages these days AND code source files that refer to the EXP field by its obsolete name... And not to mention output of numerous network analyzers (even if this has the best chance of eventually being updated). > > - they might not even read the new RFC as it seems uninteresting from its title. > > We could use the RFC erratum system, but frankly, hardly anyone ever looks at that. > > A slightly more sure way to drive the message home would be to respin all of > the updated RFCs with the correct (new) naming of the bits. > This is what most publishing organisations would do. > > Of course, we only mark the old RFCs as obsoleted in exactly the same way as > we mark them as updated. This means that they are still around and still > easy to pick up and read (witness the recent email on the list about RFC > 3036). > > So... > > All this effort and what effect? > > > There now. I, too, have wasted my time on this thread. > > Adrian > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 07:22:44 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8EF03A6952; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:22:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E6CD3A6841 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:22:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.638 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.638 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XHXnzX9trTP1 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:22:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr1.ericy.com (imr1.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF09E3A6BE0 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:22:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw751.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.51]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m7KEMjnk009925; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:22:45 -0500 Received: from eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.21]) by eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:22:44 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:22:43 -0500 Message-ID: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039D365D@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) Thread-Index: AckCnhibJYzm0S1AT5mlwVZzYVhliQAMCveA References: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF039B013A@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se> From: "Eric Gray" To: "Francois Le Faucheur IMAP" , "George Swallow" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 14:22:44.0877 (UTC) FILETIME=[369223D0:01C902D0] Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on renaming of EXP field) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Francois and George, One - highly undesirable - effect of changing the name, is that it re-informces the apparently common misunderstanding of what we typically mean by "experimental" in the IETF. I guess there are enough examples in Experimental RFCs where we've given people reason to believe that it may be "safe" to use any values, semantics, what-have-you in connection with IETF expeimental fields, in any context you care to suggest. I don't think this is generalizable, and this is (IMO) a good example of why not. My understanding of the IETF's use of "experimental" values is to allow people to reliably conduct experiments in their own laboratory networks. I've never had the impression that any of the experimental values we've defined - ever - in the IETF were effectively the same as first-come-first-serve values to be used on the public network (only without the benefit of an arbitrator - like IANA - to determine who is in fact "first-come"). We thought this was well understood, and - apparently - we thought wrong. What is really needed is to fix the hole in the way the IETF use of "experimental" is documented. Instead, we want to dodge the bullet - this time - and leave it to be fixed by someone else in the future. I have an idea: let's publish an RFC with the catchy new title of "Use of Experimental Fields Considered Dangerous" - NOT. :-) -- Eric Gray Principal Engineer Ericsson > -----Original Message----- > From: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP [mailto:flefauch@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:24 AM > To: Eric Gray > Cc: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP; George Swallow; mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on > renaming of EXP field) > Importance: High > > Hi Eric, > > On 19 Aug 2008, at 19:53, Eric Gray wrote: > > > Francois, > > > > If I didn't care about the potential for extra work (and > > possibly confusion as well), I would think "Traffic Management" > > a better (because more generic) field name than "CoS" - but it > > is still a change that may have far reaching consequences, and > > which is better handled by a better explanation of the meaning > > of the field than by any effort to come up with a better name > > for it. > > I'm assuming that the document updating the field name would also > provide such explanation (ie it can be used for Diffserv as per > RFC3270, it can be used for ECN/PCN as per xxx, it may be > used in the > future for other things that are to be defined in future RFCs...). > So those explanation would be there anyways. And I agree with > George's point that a name change will help draw attention. > > > > > However, even the field-name "Traffic Management" may > > not be generic enough. > > As I said, I doubt we'll come up with a perfect name that is precise > enough to be useful and yet can capture all the yet to be > defined use > for the field. A name that captures currently understood use and is > somewhat generic in order to cope with other applications seems like > a reasonable compromise. > > > > > > At present, we seem to be agreed that currently defined > > legitimate uses for the field are all related (at least in a > > stretch) to something to do with how frames are expected to be > > handled in forwarding. But - given a precedent established in > > RFC 3270 (which, among other things, emphasizes that meaning or > > semantics of the field depends on a common understanding of why > > an LSP was established) - it is actually clear that the field > > might mean other things as well. For example, the field might > > - in some future context - be used to indicate error handling > > for packets that will be dropped, or macro statistics buckets > > that individual packets belong to (unrelated to other handling > > of a packet so marked). > > > > In fact, we're re-hashing many of the same arguments that > > led to the field's being named as it was. > > > > So, the issue is all about what constitutes a "legitimate > > use" - which I would argue is defined by IETF consensus, and is > > an issue better handled by good explanation than by renaming. > > I think there is agreement that the actual uses for the field > have to > be defined by IETF consensus. > To me this precisely argues for changing the name of the field as it > is clearly not used for experimental purposes in these cases. > > Francois > > > > > > -- > > Eric Gray > > Principal Engineer > > Ericsson > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > >> Behalf Of Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:42 PM > >> To: George Swallow > >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Francois Le Faucheur IMAP > >> Subject: [mpls] "Traffic Management" (was Re: Poll on > >> renaming of EXP field) > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Someone earlier suggested "Traffic Management". While it can most > >> certainly be argued this would not be a perfect name either > >> (or other > >> names would be closer to "perfection"), is there a good > >> argument I am > >> missing for why "COS" is obviously better (or more "good enough") > >> than "Traffic Management"? (considering we want to capture both > >> Diffserv and ECN/PCN use of EXP field) > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Francois > >> > >> > >> On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > >> > >>> During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > >>> draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > >>> alternatives to the name COS. > >>> > >>> This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > >>> is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > >>> 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > >>> > >>> Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > >> additional > >>> comment > >>> in a separate message (with a different subject line). > >>> > >>> ...George > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> mpls mailing list > >>> mpls@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> mpls mailing list > >> mpls@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > >> > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 20 07:26:31 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCECF3A6C46; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:26:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3253C3A6C4D for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:26:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7e3C6UYr2YJJ for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:26:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from celtro.com (mailrelay.celtro.com [194.90.252.242]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B84443A6C1C for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:26:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Internal Mail-Server by mail (envelope-from Moshe.Ashkenazi@celtro.com) with SMTP; 20 Aug 2008 17:20:11 +0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 17:26:16 +0300 Message-ID: <458FE788DAFB95449C1939D94446869B02429666@clt-ex1.celtro.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-index: AckC0LSg+wqCLEYcSmyaRJboHdNLOw== From: "Moshe Ashkenazi" To: Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1831292985==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1831292985== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C902D0.B5562225" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C902D0.B5562225 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable yes This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C902D0.B5562225 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

yes



This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C902D0.B5562225-- --===============1831292985== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============1831292985==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 21 08:03:25 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 772BF3A68F8; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:03:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DA8C3A6C6B for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:19:35 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nn2On-9YoeZl for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:19:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ashesmtp03.verizonbusiness.com (ashesmtp03.verizonbusiness.com [198.4.8.167]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8B983A6BB1 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:19:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dgismtp06.wcomnet.com ([166.38.58.89]) by firewall.verizonbusiness.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-5.02 (built Oct 12 2007; 32bit)) with ESMTP id <0K5W00F1RVZG8R00@firewall.verizonbusiness.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:14:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from dgismtp06.wcomnet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by dgismtp06.mcilink.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.08 (built Sep 22 2005)) with SMTP id <0K5W00L7LVZGMX@dgismtp06.mcilink.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:14:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ASHSRV141.mcilink.com ([153.39.68.167]) by dgismtp06.mcilink.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.08 (built Sep 22 2005)) with ESMTP id <0K5W00KGTVZFIH@dgismtp06.mcilink.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:14:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ASHEVS010.mcilink.com ([153.39.69.135]) by ASHSRV141.mcilink.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:14:02 +0000 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:14:02 +0000 From: "Vullo, Anthony D (Tony)" In-reply-to: To: mpls@ietf.org Message-id: <4FF8ED3A11AC8E4F975C55066345E4E305F31234@ASHEVS010.mcilink.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Thread-topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgBgA0wg X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: References: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2008 18:14:02.0902 (UTC) FILETIME=[8684B360:01C902F0] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:03:24 -0700 Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No. -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of George Swallow Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on alternatives to the name COS. This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment in a separate message (with a different subject line). ...George _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 21 08:04:07 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47BB43A697D; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:04:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD9DE3A689F for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:17:22 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tg-z9T0+JDuO for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:17:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ihemail3.lucent.com (ihemail3.lucent.com [135.245.0.37]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 052643A66B4 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:17:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ilexp01.ndc.lucent.com (h135-3-39-1.lucent.com [135.3.39.1]) by ihemail3.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id m7JJ6hcS005371 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:06:45 -0500 (CDT) Received: from ILEXC2U03.ndc.lucent.com ([135.3.39.10]) by ilexp01.ndc.lucent.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:06:28 -0500 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:06:26 -0500 Message-ID: <108CAA2A2F88B146BA079313DDF144B50219CEF6@ILEXC2U03.ndc.lucent.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] FW: Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckCKcfSGekxuRe8Q0G117sMhuVCIwAAMo48AAEEukA= References: <48AB113C.1080908@alumni.nd.edu> From: "Vadali, Somayajulu \(Somu\)" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 19:06:28.0096 (UTC) FILETIME=[AEC97800:01C9022E] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.37 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:04:04 -0700 Subject: Re: [mpls] FW: Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Howard Green Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 2:37 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] FW: Poll on renaming of EXP field No George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is good > enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 21 20:29:04 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C35CE3A697E; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:29:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAF913A69BC for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:27:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.19 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.19 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CN_BODY_35=0.339, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vc+dbYLI2WIA for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usaga01-in.huawei.com (usaga01-in.huawei.com [206.16.17.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83B113A696E for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (usaga01-in [172.18.4.6]) by usaga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K5Z00F39G972K@usaga01-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:27:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com ([172.17.1.31]) by usaga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K5Z001OYG96BL@usaga01-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:27:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.24.1.12] (Forwarded-For: [10.70.143.158]) by szxmc03-in.huawei.com (mshttpd); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:26:50 +0800 Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:26:50 +0800 From: mushaoxing 63008 In-reply-to: To: mpls@ietf.org Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: iPlanet Messenger Express 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006) Content-language: zh-CN Content-disposition: inline X-Accept-Language: zh-CN Priority: normal References: Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Tk8KCgoKZGVsaWdlbmNlLHN0cml2ZSxhY2hpZXZlbWVudCxoYXBwaW5lc3MhCiAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgc2hhb3hpbmcgbXUKCi0tLS0tINSt08q8/iAtLS0tLQq3orz+yMs6IG1w bHMtcmVxdWVzdEBpZXRmLm9yZwrI1cbaOiDQx8bazuUsILDL1MIgMjLI1SwgMjAwOCDJz87nMzow MArW98ziOiBtcGxzIERpZ2VzdCwgVm9sIDUyLCBJc3N1ZSAyMQoKPiBTZW5kIG1wbHMgbWFpbGlu ZyBsaXN0IHN1Ym1pc3Npb25zIHRvCj4gCW1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcKPiAKPiBUbyBzdWJzY3JpYmUg b3IgdW5zdWJzY3JpYmUgdmlhIHRoZSBXb3JsZCBXaWRlIFdlYiwgdmlzaXQKPiAJaHR0cHM6Ly93 d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9tcGxzCj4gb3IsIHZpYSBlbWFpbCwgc2VuZCBh IG1lc3NhZ2Ugd2l0aCBzdWJqZWN0IG9yIGJvZHkgJ2hlbHAnIHRvCj4gCW1wbHMtcmVxdWVzdEBp ZXRmLm9yZwo+IAo+IFlvdSBjYW4gcmVhY2ggdGhlIHBlcnNvbiBtYW5hZ2luZyB0aGUgbGlzdCBh dAo+IAltcGxzLW93bmVyQGlldGYub3JnCj4gCj4gV2hlbiByZXBseWluZywgcGxlYXNlIGVkaXQg eW91ciBTdWJqZWN0IGxpbmUgc28gaXQgaXMgbW9yZSBzcGVjaWZpYwo+IHRoYW4gIlJlOiBDb250 ZW50cyBvZiBtcGxzIGRpZ2VzdC4uLiIKPiAKPiAKPiBUb2RheSdzIFRvcGljczoKPiAKPiAgIDEu IFJlOiBQb2xsIG9uIHJlbmFtaW5nIG9mIEVYUCBmaWVsZCAoVnVsbG8sIEFudGhvbnkgRCAoVG9u eSkpCj4gICAyLiBSZTogRlc6ICBQb2xsIG9uIHJlbmFtaW5nIG9mIEVYUCBmaWVsZCAoVmFkYWxp LCBTb21heWFqdWx1IAo+IChTb211KSkKPiAKPiAtLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tCj4gLS0tCj4gCj4gTWVzc2Fn ZTogMQo+IERhdGU6IFdlZCwgMjAgQXVnIDIwMDggMTg6MTQ6MDIgKzAwMDAKPiBGcm9tOiAiVnVs bG8sIEFudGhvbnkgRCAoVG9ueSkiIDx0b255LnZ1bGxvQHZlcml6b25idXNpbmVzcy5jb20+Cj4g U3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFttcGxzXSBQb2xsIG9uIHJlbmFtaW5nIG9mIEVYUCBmaWVsZAo+IFRvOiBt cGxzQGlldGYub3JnCj4gTWVzc2FnZS1JRDoKPiAJPDRGRjhFRDNBMTFBQzhFNEY5NzVDNTUwNjYz NDVFNEUzMDVGMzEyMzRAQVNIRVZTMDEwLm1jaWxpbmsuY29tPgo+IENvbnRlbnQtVHlwZTogdGV4 dC9wbGFpbjsgY2hhcnNldD11cy1hc2NpaQo+IAo+IE5vLgo+IAo+IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVz c2FnZS0tLS0tCj4gRnJvbTogbXBscy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIFttYWlsdG86bXBscy1ib3Vu Y2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiAKPiBCZWhhbGYgT2YKPiBHZW9yZ2UgU3dhbGxvdwo+IFNlbnQ6IE1v bmRheSwgQXVndXN0IDE4LCAyMDA4IDQ6MjQgUE0KPiBUbzogbXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZwo+IFN1Ympl Y3Q6IFttcGxzXSBQb2xsIG9uIHJlbmFtaW5nIG9mIEVYUCBmaWVsZAo+IAo+IER1cmluZyB0aGUg bGFzdCBjYWxsIG9uICJFWFAgZmllbGQiIHJlbmFtZWQgdG8gICJDb1MgRmllbGQiCj4gZHJhZnQt aWV0Zi1tcGxzLWNvc2ZpZWxkLWRlZi0wNC50eHQsIHRoZXJlIHdlcmUgY29tbWVudHMgb24gCj4g YWx0ZXJuYXRpdmVzdG8gdGhlIG5hbWUgQ09TLgo+IAo+IFRoaXMgbWVzc2FnZSBpbml0aWF0ZXMg YSB0d28gd2VlayBwb2xsIG9uIHdoZXRoZXIgdGhlIG5hbWUgQ09TIGlzIGdvb2QKPiBlbm91Z2gs IG9yIGlmIHNvbWUgb3RoZXIgbmFtZSBpcyBuZWVkZWQuICBUaGUgcG9sbCBjbG9zZXMKPiAyMzo1 OSBTZXB0IDEgR01ULiAKPiAKPiBQbGVhc2UgYW5zd2VyIHdpdGggYSBzaW1wbGUgeWVzIG9yIG5v LiAgWW91IG1heSBzZW5kIGFueSBhZGRpdGlvbmFsCj4gY29tbWVudCBpbiBhIHNlcGFyYXRlIG1l c3NhZ2UgKHdpdGggYSBkaWZmZXJlbnQgc3ViamVjdCBsaW5lKS4KPiAKPiAuLi5HZW9yZ2UKPiAK PiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwo+IG1wbHMg bWFpbGluZyBsaXN0Cj4gbXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZwo+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxt YW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbXBscwo+IAo+IAo+IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQo+ IAo+IE1lc3NhZ2U6IDIKPiBEYXRlOiBUdWUsIDE5IEF1ZyAyMDA4IDE0OjA2OjI2IC0wNTAwCj4g RnJvbTogIlZhZGFsaSwgU29tYXlhanVsdSBcKFNvbXVcKSIgPHZhZGFsaUBhbGNhdGVsLWx1Y2Vu dC5jb20+Cj4gU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFttcGxzXSBGVzogIFBvbGwgb24gcmVuYW1pbmcgb2YgRVhQ IGZpZWxkCj4gVG86IDxtcGxzQGlldGYub3JnPgo+IE1lc3NhZ2UtSUQ6Cj4gCTwxMDhDQUEyQTJG ODhCMTQ2QkEwNzkzMTNEREYxNDRCNTAyMTlDRUY2QElMRVhDMlUwMy5uZGMubHVjZW50LmNvbT4K PiBDb250ZW50LVR5cGU6IHRleHQvcGxhaW47CWNoYXJzZXQ9IlVTLUFTQ0lJIgo+IAo+IE5vIAo+ IAo+IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tCj4gRnJvbTogbXBscy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYu b3JnIFttYWlsdG86bXBscy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiAKPiBCZWhhbGYgT2YKPiBIb3dh cmQgR3JlZW4KPiBTZW50OiBUdWVzZGF5LCBBdWd1c3QgMTksIDIwMDggMjozNyBQTQo+IFRvOiBt cGxzQGlldGYub3JnCj4gU3ViamVjdDogW21wbHNdIEZXOiBQb2xsIG9uIHJlbmFtaW5nIG9mIEVY UCBmaWVsZAo+IAo+IE5vCj4gCj4gR2VvcmdlIFN3YWxsb3cgd3JvdGU6Cj4gPiBEdXJpbmcgdGhl IGxhc3QgY2FsbCBvbiAiRVhQIGZpZWxkIiByZW5hbWVkIHRvICAiQ29TIEZpZWxkIgo+ID4gZHJh ZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWNvc2ZpZWxkLWRlZi0wNC50eHQsIHRoZXJlIHdlcmUgY29tbWVudHMgb24g Cj4gPiBhbHRlcm5hdGl2ZXMgdG8gdGhlIG5hbWUgQ09TLgo+ID4KPiA+IFRoaXMgbWVzc2FnZSBp bml0aWF0ZXMgYSB0d28gd2VlayBwb2xsIG9uIHdoZXRoZXIgdGhlIG5hbWUgQ09TIAo+IGlzIGdv b2QKPiAKPiA+IGVub3VnaCwgb3IgaWYgc29tZSBvdGhlciBuYW1lIGlzIG5lZWRlZC4gIFRoZSBw b2xsIGNsb3Nlcwo+ID4gMjM6NTkgU2VwdCAxIEdNVC4KPiA+Cj4gPiBQbGVhc2UgYW5zd2VyIHdp dGggYSBzaW1wbGUgeWVzIG9yIG5vLiAgWW91IG1heSBzZW5kIGFueSAKPiBhZGRpdGlvbmFsIAo+ ID4gY29tbWVudCBpbiBhIHNlcGFyYXRlIG1lc3NhZ2UgKHdpdGggYSBkaWZmZXJlbnQgc3ViamVj dCBsaW5lKS4KPiA+Cj4gPiAuLi5HZW9yZ2UKPiA+Cj4gPiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwo+ID4gbXBscyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKPiA+IG1wbHNA aWV0Zi5vcmcKPiA+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbXBscwo+ ID4KPiA+ICAKPiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f Xwo+IG1wbHMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0Cj4gbXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZwo+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYu b3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vbXBscwo+IAo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCj4gbXBscyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKPiBtcGxzQGlldGYub3Jn Cj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9tcGxzCj4gCj4gCj4gLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tCj4gCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KPiBtcGxzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdAo+IG1wbHNAaWV0Zi5v cmcKPiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL21wbHMKPiAKPiAKPiBF bmQgb2YgbXBscyBEaWdlc3QsIFZvbCA1MiwgSXNzdWUgMjEKPiAqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioq KioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioKPiAKX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX18KbXBscyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKbXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZwpodHRwczovL3d3dy5p ZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL21wbHMK From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 21 20:41:07 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7493128C153; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:41:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB37D28C151 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:38:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.494 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.494 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5WNTG9FS+VG0 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:38:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (unknown [119.145.14.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 759393A69FA for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:38:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga01-in [172.24.2.3]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K5Z00DO1GQDGC@szxga01-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:37:26 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.1.24]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K5Z00A6ZGQDTF@szxga01-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:37:25 +0800 (CST) Received: from hpSAQUIB ([10.18.23.101]) by szxml04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0K5Z00M9NGQBSZ@szxml04-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:37:25 +0800 (CST) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:07:14 +0530 From: saquib khan In-reply-to: To: mpls@ietf.org Message-id: <003c01c90408$5eaaa160$6517120a@china.huawei.com> Organization: htipl MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgCmAerA Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: saquibk@huawei.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2023770764==" Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============2023770764== Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_WL5qQwvLSEfi6wgVon7W/A)" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_WL5qQwvLSEfi6wgVon7W/A) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT NO **************************************************************************** **************************************************************************** *********** **************************************************************************** **************************************************************************** *********** This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! **************************************************************************** **************************************************************************** *********** -----Original Message----- From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of George Swallow Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:54 AM To: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on alternatives to the name COS. This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment in a separate message (with a different subject line). ...George _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --Boundary_(ID_WL5qQwvLSEfi6wgVon7W/A) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

NO

 

 *******************************************************************************************************************************************************************

 

*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************

 

This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!

 

*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of George Swallow
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 1:54 AM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field

 

During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to  "CoS Field"

draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on

alternatives to the name COS.

 

This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS

is good enough, or if some other name is needed.  The poll closes

23:59 Sept 1 GMT.

 

Please answer with a simple yes or no.  You may send any additional comment

in a separate message (with a different subject line).

 

...George

 

_______________________________________________

mpls mailing list

mpls@ietf.org

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

--Boundary_(ID_WL5qQwvLSEfi6wgVon7W/A)-- --===============2023770764== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --===============2023770764==-- From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 22 00:53:10 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AA523A69C4; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:50:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5053A69F5 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:35:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GpN1gC60GFGT for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:35:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (mailgw4.ericsson.se [193.180.251.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D96A3A69E6 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:35:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 7906121189; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:35:37 +0200 (CEST) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3e-a6680bb000007a96-b3-48ae6c49284e Received: from esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.121]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 66B2920FEB; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:35:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from esealmw118.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.77]) by esealmw128.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:35:37 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 09:35:36 +0200 Message-ID: <93DFCD4B101EB440B5B72997456C5F940277B65F@esealmw118.eemea.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <265FFDD7-F660-41FB-8A3C-8B5545B9A788@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckCF9CxRNGJ1DxlRTSxjTMsg58+ygCEad1A References: <265FFDD7-F660-41FB-8A3C-8B5545B9A788@cisco.com> From: "Annamaria Fulignoli" To: "George Swallow" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Aug 2008 07:35:37.0225 (UTC) FILETIME=[AB61BF90:01C90429] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No. BR Annamaria On 18 Aug 2008, at 22:23, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is good > enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sat Aug 23 16:31:38 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E3E3A6980; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:31:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A1543A6980 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:31:37 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oImsZnzDG1Ju for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:31:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3DCD3A690B for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:31:35 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,261,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="18534138" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Aug 2008 23:31:31 +0000 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7NNVV2v001739 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:31:31 -0400 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7NNVVFl015654 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:31:31 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-203.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.20]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:31:31 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:30:20 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBm4c4eJfEnmICTTWYGKZ0bPOVpAATShZwAOPdlWA= References: <200808190932413545202@huawei.com> From: "Zafar Ali (zali)" To: "George Swallow (swallow)" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Aug 2008 23:31:31.0074 (UTC) FILETIME=[5F5A5620:01C90578] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1509; t=1219534291; x=1220398291; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=zali@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Zafar=20Ali=20(zali)=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[mpls]=20Poll=20on=20renaming=20of=20EX P=20field |Sender:=20 |To:=20=22George=20Swallow=20(swallow)=22=20,=20; bh=9f/xojoGxDxYKG49fVARLXXQale9Yi5e4BOweIJTf9k=; b=K+wjZmPcIvALZtxlGcG9Rw7+zfvvzx3FuVvDpe6pBXCO4efIGw1VE8CxxB IKzHuuGPBgwb9JkeBZ/sENmcwfWk+CSjItauiCghROeXcNIy9ZAl9UtDbTgw fceo1nbBOm; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=zali@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes- Thanks Regards... Zafar > ________________________________________ > Jordan Britnell > IP Technology Research > BCE/Bell Canada > (416) 215-3729 > jordan.britnell@bell.ca > > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Cao Wei > Sent: August 18, 2008 9:33 PM > To: George Swallow; mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > Yes, > > Wei Cao > On 2008-08-19, at 04:23:38 George Swallow wrote: > > >During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > >draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > >alternatives to the name COS. > > > >This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name > COS is good > >enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > >23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > > >Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > >comment in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > > >...George > > > >_______________________________________________ > >mpls mailing list > >mpls@ietf.org > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > Best regards, > Cao Wei > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 24 01:29:40 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42F7C3A692B; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 01:29:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150F83A692B for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 01:29:39 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ot2awyarmJop for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 01:29:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eci-iron1.ecitele.com (eci-iron1.ecitele.com [147.234.242.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D43393A6867 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 01:29:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown (HELO ILPTAM01.ecitele.com) ([147.234.244.44]) by eci-iron1.ecitele.com with ESMTP; 24 Aug 2008 11:34:59 +0300 Received: from ILPTEXCH02.ecitele.com ([147.234.245.181]) by ILPTAM01.ecitele.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:29:36 +0300 Received: from ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com ([147.234.244.212]) by ILPTEXCH02.ecitele.com ([147.234.245.181]) with mapi; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:29:36 +0300 From: Andrew Sergeev To: George Swallow Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:29:34 +0300 Thread-Topic: Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgBLRxHQAMmEFXA= Message-ID: <113FD89103AE4B42B68B751725FE884B84CE3E9B37@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Aug 2008 08:29:36.0944 (UTC) FILETIME=[8B3B2300:01C905C3] Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No. Regards, Andrew, > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of George Swallow > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:24 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 24 02:20:45 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83ADF3A6AC4; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:20:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55DFC3A6AC4 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:20:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.3 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JehCQa7HmQKD for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:20:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freesbee.wheel.dk (freesbee.wheel.dk [IPv6:2001:6c8:1:1000::97]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7156F3A6A75 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:20:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by freesbee.wheel.dk (Postfix, from userid 1038) id CA5032E44B; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:20:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:20:41 +0200 From: Michael =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lyngb=F8l?= To: George Swallow Message-ID: <20080824092041.GH83989@freesbee.wheel.dk> References: <113FD89103AE4B42B68B751725FE884B84CE3E9B37@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <113FD89103AE4B42B68B751725FE884B84CE3E9B37@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com> X-Evil: Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! X-Free: live free, or die! X-Operating-System: FreeBSD/i386 6.3-STABLE SMP X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CA6 3789 1455 8FC2 D499 F22A D763 1ABB 9E4A 37AE X-PGP-Public-Key: http://freesbee.wheel.dk/~lyngbol/gpgkey.pub User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > > alternatives to the name COS. > > > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > > additional comment > > in a separate message (with a different subject line). No. /Michael -- = Michael Lyngb=F8l -- michael at lyngbol dot dk Network Architect, AS3292 TDC, IP=B7backbone _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 24 02:40:51 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378ED3A6BF2; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:40:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC7073A6BF2 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:40:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CsSImnKJ9QxG for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:40:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.smtp.bt.com (smtp4.smtp.bt.com [217.32.164.151]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D34BC3A68C2 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 02:40:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from E03MVB3-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net ([193.113.197.111]) by smtp4.smtp.bt.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:40:43 +0100 Received: from 217.32.164.184 ([217.32.164.184]) by E03MVB3-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net ([193.113.197.60]) via Exchange Front-End Server mail.bt.com ([193.113.197.28]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:40:42 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.11.0.080522 Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 10:40:41 +0100 From: Ben Niven-Jenkins To: George Swallow , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgEXSuaF In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Aug 2008 09:40:43.0240 (UTC) FILETIME=[7A243E80:01C905CD] Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Yes. Ben On 18/08/2008 21:23, "George Swallow" wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 24 06:24:16 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBED23A6C97; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:24:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90E0D3A6C97 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:24:14 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yLOxjho8zWPT for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:24:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.174]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4F7F3A6B21 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:24:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 27so1211976wfd.31 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:24:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=Lb8iBKIHQiRwsblErKqnb4/tMsph+SdS3bkGsIIMpyw=; b=vQehXWQjnu5OCRqCJdcJI4V+R1ZBnu/2b/8gRSFPCb0bVJTmxFI7tIMSSG6eGK/RIM gq/hgzRJle7sbPI+xHC1b4GITherLsym7Qg33bfLxyRoDP3U7Klqf9gZjlUXD/YLHEoh c+FJ/5n7Q/2rmczT/mhImdYxe4BASUe7fne0Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=r7cQCeFNgiSeWzVON2fFKytn+/Y08U4kf3qVAV2xhvtjKbOv0mfbIpLzKgz1fC+PIr C+Lp7PYYl65ZWbJpTLrVypiEyrDgH304p09CiSFScdvklVVaXEszCWzzqTNb4iFWfoG2 m3/XK7T+SEqnYVB7cIZSnYzJmidx4jyPqQYJA= Received: by 10.142.49.4 with SMTP id w4mr1156294wfw.201.1219584247521; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.7.10 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:24:07 -0400 From: "Andrew G. Malis" To: "George Swallow" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No. On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 4:23 PM, George Swallow wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 24 19:25:59 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4D1A3A6834; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:25:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A43413A68A4 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:25:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.185 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.185 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pgY51r+jQipk for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from QMTA04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.62.40]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02373A6834 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from OMTA09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.20]) by QMTA04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 6Fci1a0090SCNGk54SRjyg; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 02:25:43 +0000 Received: from cekoevcfc72fcd ([68.38.207.77]) by OMTA09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 6SRh1a00X1gjd303VSRilS; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 02:25:43 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=wAjUIOAN84YA:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=xiyKFeZXZuObFhL4kskA:9 a=o2QzG9iMIWwP0TCC1DYA:7 a=vs_PDUWfEJsnfX_lyK6Xl5zO-YAA:4 a=JfD0Fch1gWkA:10 a=lZB815dzVvQA:10 a=f8eoc1PjULsA:10 From: "buyukkoc" To: "'George Swallow'" , Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:25:41 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgEXSuaFACMT0+A= In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Message-Id: <20080825022557.B02373A6834@core3.amsl.com> Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org NO Cagatay On 18/08/2008 21:23, "George Swallow" wrote: > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS is good > enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any additional > comment in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 24 19:28:25 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A48C03A68AD; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:28:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D9D43A68AD for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:28:24 -0700 (PDT) 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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eHkdzcrfnQVa for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:28:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zcars04e.nortel.com (zcars04e.nortel.com [47.129.242.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1B3C3A67F5 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:28:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com (zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com [47.140.202.51]) by zcars04e.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id m7P2PmS26425 for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 02:25:48 GMT x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:28:00 -0400 Message-ID: <34B3EAA5B3066A42914D28C5ECF5FEA41663E647@zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field Thread-Index: AckBcE00i7UqvG1jEd2DSgAewhIyZgE6cVlg References: From: "Don Fedyk" To: Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org No Don > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of George Swallow > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Poll on renaming of EXP field > > During the last call on "EXP field" renamed to "CoS Field" > draft-ietf-mpls-cosfield-def-04.txt, there were comments on > alternatives to the name COS. > > This message initiates a two week poll on whether the name COS > is good enough, or if some other name is needed. The poll closes > 23:59 Sept 1 GMT. > > Please answer with a simple yes or no. You may send any > additional comment > in a separate message (with a different subject line). > > ...George > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From mpls-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 29 09:30:14 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16AD628C0FF; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:30:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 143053A6A63; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:30:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.106 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.104, BAYES_50=0.001, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tPGUPIyJINn1; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACD743A6A59; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:30:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id m7TGU47B007616; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:30:06 +0100 Received: from your029b8cecfe (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7TGU3ej007600; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:30:03 +0100 Message-ID: <0a8601c909f4$7c014ce0$0300a8c0@your029b8cecfe> From: "Adrian Farrel" To: , Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:29:50 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Comments on ITU's Work Plan for Optical Transport Networks X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Adrian Farrel List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org Hi, We received a liaison back in February (https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/425/) asking for our comments on ITU-T Study Group 15's "Optical Transport Networks & Technologies Standardization Work Plan" (http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com15/otn/index.html) Please let me know by Friday September 5th if you have any comments you would like us to make. If I don't receive anything, I will send a response to thank them for keeping us informed and asking them to share any future work plans with us. Thanks, Adrian _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls