Hi Adrian,
Thanks very much.
I can update the nits and editorial issues quickly, but I would like to discuss
more with you for the following points to make things clear before I update the
draft.
=========================================================================================
Please consider and note what updates to GMPLS management tools are needed.
[Fatai]This has been mentioned in [Framework] document. Did you mean that we
need add one sentence in some place of this document to refer to [Framework]
document to mention management tools?
Are there any changes to the Alarms that might arise? We have a document for
that.
[Fatai] No. RFC4783 is still applicable.
Are there any changes to the way OAM is controlled? We have a document for that.
[Fatai] No, it could be done through NMS or
[draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-sdh-otn-oam-ext].
Should the new G-PIDs show in the TC MIB managed by IANA at
https://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib/ianagmplstc-mib.xhtml
This should happen automgically when the feeding registries are updated
but it is probably best to add a specific request for IANA.
[Fatai] Will do that.
Will other MIB work be needed (in the future) to make it possible to
read new information (labels, tspecs) from network devices?
[Fatai] I am not sure. I asked the similar question (not on this draft) during
Berlin meeting. The chairs answered that it could be driven by drafts.
Best Regards
Fatai
-----Original Message-----
From: ccamp-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ccamp-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 2:51 AM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Cc: ccamp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Last Call:
<draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11.txt> (Generalized Multi-Protocol
Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical
Transport Networks Control) to Proposed Standard
As sponsoring AD I have the following last call comments I hope you will take on
board.
Thanks,
Adrian
Please fix the two lines that are too long (see idnits)
---
Please expand "OTN" on first use in the main text.
Please expand "TS" on its first use.
---
6.2
The ingress node of an LSP MAY include Label ERO (Explicit Route
Object) to indicate the label in each hops along the path.
Missing "subobject".
---
6.2.1
When an upstream node receives a Resv message containing an
GENERALIZED_LABEL object
s/an/a/
---
Please consider and note what updates to GMPLS management tools are
needed.
Are there any changes to the Alarms that might arise? We have a document
for that.
Are there any changes to the way OAM is controlled? We have a document
for that.
Should the new G-PIDs show in the TC MIB managed by IANA at
https://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib/ianagmplstc-mib.xhtml
This should happen automgically when the feeding registries are updated
but it is probably best to add a specific request for IANA.
Will other MIB work be needed (in the future) to make it possible to
read new information (labels, tspecs) from network devices?
---
Please fix so that you have three sections:
Authors' Addresses (only those people on the front page)
Contributors (other people who made significant text contributions to
the document)
Acknowledgements (other people who helped with the work)
---
[OTN-OSPF] should be a normative reference for its use to define the
value of the switching type used in signaling.
_______________________________________________
CCAMP mailing list
CCAMP(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp