[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ANCP] ANCP Protocol Versioning

Title: ANCP Protocol Versioning
Not sure I fully understand your note. Are you proposing that the rfc editors note the version 3.2 rfc should refer to version 3.1 and call the two as "incompatible"? Seems rather obvious. If on the other hand the note should imply that 3.2 is  fully backwards compatible to 3.1, then there really seems to be no need to have 3.2. Besides this, it's an implementation choice whether a node will recognise v3.1 (which interesting enough will not be defined anywhere by then) and 3.2.
 
-Woj.

From: Alan Kavanagh [mailto:alan.kavanagh at ericsson.com]
Sent: 29 July 2009 15:30
To: Wojciech Dec (wdec); ancp at ietf.org
Subject: RE: [ANCP] ANCP Protocol Versioning

Cheers Woj
 
The only point i would note (excuse if it was already raised on Monday as i did not attend) is "backward compatibility" between the different versions of 3.1, 3.2 and future versions if/when/as needed. this should be noted in the draft.
 
Alan

From: Wojciech Dec (wdec) [mailto:wdec at cisco.com]
Sent: July 29, 2009 3:33 AM
To: Alan Kavanagh; ancp at ietf.org
Subject: RE: [ANCP] ANCP Protocol Versioning

Not entirely. ANCP already has a versioning field, hence nothing new is being defined. Also strictly speaking there is no distinction between version and sub-version, so the choice of 3.2 is purely based on custom (it can equally well have been 4.0).
Of course this will mean that all "pre-rfc" implementations will automatically be 100% incompatible with the rfc.
 
-Woj.

From: Alan Kavanagh [mailto:alan.kavanagh at ericsson.com]
Sent: 28 July 2009 19:28
To: Wojciech Dec (wdec); ancp at ietf.org
Subject: RE: [ANCP] ANCP Protocol Versioning

Hi Woj et.al
 
So are we agreeing that option 1 as noted on slide 15 in the Thomas's presentation is what was agreed on at yesterdays meeting?
 
BR
Alan K

From: ancp-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ancp-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Wojciech Dec (wdec)
Sent: July 28, 2009 5:30 AM
To: ancp at ietf.org
Subject: [ANCP] ANCP Protocol Versioning

Hi All,

During yesterday's ANCP WG meeting at IET75 we discussed the topic of ANCP versioning and in the room arrived at the following conclusion:

The Pre-RFC version of ANC will continue to be 3.1 as per draft-ietf-ancp-protocol, however an RFC Editor's note will be introduced to change version from 3.1 to 3.2 upon publication of the RFC. This will clearly de-lineate any pre-RFC implementations with post-RFC ones and alleviate the operators'' problems presented (http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/75/slides/ancp-3.ppt)

Going beyond the publication of the RFC, the introduction of new capabilities or TLVs is expected to be handled by the capability negotiation mechanism (and new capabilities) or possibly by generalizing the notion of sub-capability currently in place for the multicast-control use-cases.

We would like to get feedback from the wider WG on the above, especially in terms of anyone who was not able to voice their opinion at the meeting. Based on the received feedback, we'll make a call regarding the WG consensus on this matter.

Regards,
Woj.