RE: Fw: more changes to the base draft

"Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <[email protected]> Fri, 5 Dec 2003 17:03:06 -0800
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.gsmp
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Avri

I had one question on this..
Technically speaking GRMP seems quite different from GSMP v3
to me. How could you possibly merge these protocols ?
I must be missing something here.


Thanks
Hormuzd

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Avri
Doria
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 3:55 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Fw: [GSMP] more changes to the base draft


Hi Weiming,

comments inline.

On onsdag, nov 26, 2003, at 17:52 Asia/Seoul, Wang,Weiming wrote:

>
>  Hi Avri,
>
>  I'm writing to seek the possiblity in GSMP base header to add=20
> following items:
>
>  1. A proirity flag to indicate the processing priority for the=20
> message.

Can you explain how you would think this should be used?

>  2. An optional checksum part in GSMP for error control.

Again, can you explain how you would want to see this used?

>
>  If possible, I also ask to leave some space in the Version field for=20
> possible including of other
>  possible protocols like GRMP=20
> (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wang-forces-grmp-01.txt).

  If the two protocols were to be merged it would seem to make the most=20
sense to me for there to be one base protocol which supported the MPLS=20
and GMPLS mode as well as the router mode.  I would personally be=20
uncomfortable with one version of the protocol for switches and one for=20
routers.  In many respects I think that the support  one would need for=20
adding messages for router support already exists.

If this merge is something that is of interest to the Wg and something=20
we can get IESG support for (i think it would require a charter=20
amendment) then I think we could certainly work out the details here on=20
the list.

I do think your first 2 requests can be discussed within the current =20
work without any charter  problems.  For the other, I would like to=20
hear from other list members on whether it is something that the WG=20
should pursue.

a.


_______________________________________________
GSMP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gsmp