RE: GMPLS TLV Format

[<julien.meuric@orange-ftgroup.com>]

Hi.

Agreed.

But do you think a draft 4420bis "Created: March 11" and dated "03-10"
on the CCAMP status page will be fast enough to progress back to 4420
publishing ages? ;-)

Julien


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Lou Berger

Just to avoid any possible silence:

I think fixing RFC 4420 *quickly* would be best.

Lou

At 04:02 PM 3/10/2008, Adrian Farrel wrote:
>Hi,
>
>In today's meeting, we discussed again the issue of TLV formats in:
>
>- RFC 3209 and RFC 3471
>- RFC 4420
>- draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters-03.txt
>
>The current position is:
>- Base RSVP-TE and GMPLS carry the full length of the
>  TLV in the Length field
>- OSPF carries the length of the Value field only in the
>  TLV
>- RFC 4420 follows the OSPF form. This was an error
>   that was not intended.
>- draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters followed
>   RFC 4420 (assuming that the WG had made a deliberate
>   change)
>
>The bottom line is that it is not helpful to implementers that one 
>protocol has two different ways to encode TLVs.
>
>We must choose between three options.
>1. All TLVs are encoded as per RFC 3209.
>    RFC 4420 would need to be fixed.
>   draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters would
>    need to be changed.
>2. All TLVs *except* those in RFC 4420 use the
>    RFC 3209 format. RFC 4420 remains an anomaly.
>3. All old TLVs remain as per RFC 3209. All new
>    TLVs (starting from RFC 4420) use the RFC 4420
>    format.
>
>The meeting seemed to prefer option 1, but this is contingent on 
>existing implementations. If there are too many existing and 
>deployed implementations (too many == 1 ?) we may have to pick to
option 2.
>
>So...
>
>How would you feel if we did an update to RFC 4420 that fixed the 
>TLV encoding to be conformant with RFC 3209? Would this cause any of 
>you a problem?
>
>Reply on-list or to me in private if there is a confidentiality issue.
>
>It would be helpful to have opinions on both sides. Please don't 
>leave silence to mean anything specific.
>
>Thanks,
>Adrian
>
>
>