Re: Packet redirect:fixed meta data ID assignment,into IANA part?

Hi Fenggen,

I believe you are correct (please open an issue tracker on this).
We should probably define a few of them ourselves and have IANA issue
the rest.
I am reading through the redirect section in order to respond to you and
reaching a conclusion that this is not how we have implemented and
that infact there may be a redundancy involved. Anyways, this is a
separate discussion.

cheers,
jamal

On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 09:43 +0800, Jia Fenggen wrote:
>    In protocol draft version 8,the redirect packet is transimitted to CE 
> using an redirect TLV encapsulation which has two main 
> constructors:meta-data ILVs which encapsulate the associated meta 
> informations with the packet such as output id,input port id etc and 
> Redirect data TLV which encapsulate the real packet.According to meta 
> ILV,the identifier of meta data is important,I look through issue32,it 
> seems that on paris wg meeting we have come to an consensus that static 
> metadata assignment will be used, with metadata transcoding as necessary.To 
> make static meta data assignment,i think we should put meta data ID 
> assignment to IANA consideration,if that is the case,then we need some 
> inital meta data definitions,are there any mistakes,thanks.