I would like to support Nurit's comments below. In particular, in the
past the ITU-T has expanded upon or changed the usage of IETF
codepoint allocations, in some cases incompatibly with its original
usage or definition. In the future, all codepoint allocations to the
ITU-T should be tied to one specific, dated revision of their
specification only. This is similar to the ITU-T's own processes, such
as section 2.2.1 of Rec. A.5, which requires a version number and/or
date for referenced outside documents in ITU-T recommendations.
Cheers,
Andy
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod
HaSharon) <nurit(_dot_)sprecher(_at_)nsn(_dot_)com> wrote:
Hi,
I cannot support the publication of the document in its current version.
I have the following concerns:
• It is indicated that the channel is intended to be used to carry
Ethernet based OAM messages. It is not clear why there is a need for ACH.
PWs can be used to transmit Ethernet OAM.
If the intention is to use the channel for OAM messages for operating
MPLS-TP based networks, the IETF *already* defined a solution for MPLS-TP
OAM and I expect to see first a technical *justification* why a second
solution is needed. In addition, I would expect to see *references to the
arguments* raised in draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-considerations.
• It is not clear what the maturity status of G.8113.1 is. It seems
that the document was not approved by SG15 and the discussion was deferred
to WTSA. This indicates that there is *no consensus* for the approval of
G.8113.1. A code point should not be allocated before a consensus/decision
is reached in the ITU-T and before the document is mature and approved. I do
not think it is appropriate to allocate a code point and try to force a
resolution in the ITU-T.
• I find a contradiction in the draft. In one place it is mentioned:
"These Ethernet based OAM messages and procedures, address the OAM
functional requirements defined in [RFC5860]. Other message types should not
be carried behind this code point." In another place it is mentioned: "all
ITU-T Recommendations are subject to revision. Therefore, the code point
allocated by this document may be used for future versions of [G.8113.1].".
The last statement opens the door for the definition of additional messages
in G.8113.1 in the following versions, for example, for APS (supporting
linear or ring protection mechanisms) and by this creates two solutions for
other mechanisms as well.
The use of the code point can go much beyond its original purpose and it
will hide other messages....a code point should not be allocated at this
point at all, but specifically not for unknown usage that may be defined in
future versions of G.8113.1.
Best regards,
Nurit
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-announce-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:ietf-announce-
bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of The IESG
Sent: 22 February 2012 15:13
To: IETF-Announce
Subject: Last Call: <draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point-03.txt>
(Allocation of
an
Associated Channel Code Point for Use by ITU-T Ethernet based OAM) to
Informational RFC
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to
consider
the following document:
- 'Allocation of an Associated Channel Code Point for Use by ITU-T
Ethernet based OAM'
<draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point-03.txt> as an Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2012-03-21. Exceptionally,
comments may
be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This document assigns an Associated Channel Type code point for
carrying Ethernet based Operations, Administration, and Management
messages in the MPLS Generic Associated Channel (G-ACh).
The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf