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

Re: [ANCP] Changes to ANCP multicast

To: Le Faucheur Francois <flefauch at cisco.com>, Tom Taylor <tom.taylor at rogers.com>
Subject: Re: [ANCP] Changes to ANCP multicast
From: Francois Le Faucheur <flefauch at cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:54:02 +0200
Authentication-results: ams-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
Cc: ancp at ietf.org
Delivered-to: ancp at core3.amsl.com
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=flefauch at cisco.com; l=3126; q=dns/txt; s=amsiport01001; t=1255013645; x=1256223245; h=from:sender:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:to:cc: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-id: content-description:resent-date:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-to:resent-cc:resent-message-id:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:list-owner:list-archive; z=From:=20Francois=20Le=20Faucheur=20<flefauch at cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re:=20Changes=20to=20ANCP=20multicast|Date: =20Thu,=208=20Oct=202009=2016:54:02=20+0200|Message-Id: =20<3C937557-C0B9-4C04-8CB9-36588A37CCBE at cisco.com>|To: =20Le=20Faucheur=20Francois=20<flefauch at cisco.com>,=0D=0A =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20Tom=20Taylor=20<tom.taylor at rogers .com>|Cc:=20Maglione=20Roberta=20<roberta.maglione at teleco mitalia.it>,=0D=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20Dec=20Wojciech =20<wdec at cisco.com>,=20ancp at ietf.org|Mime-Version:=201.0 =20(Apple=20Message=20framework=20v1076) |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207bit|In-Reply-To:=20<CC3BC5 C3-80B3-4079-90E0-CA829692083F at cisco.com>|References:=20< 4ACB5AA7.5070807 at rogers.com>=20<282BBE8A501E1F4DA9C775F96 4BB21FE3E670E7FCF at GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local>=20<4ACB5F 01.9020709 at rogers.com>=20<CC3BC5C3-80B3-4079-90E0-CA82969 2083F at cisco.com>; bh=cdKIpbERQ8YuEIZUq9VsTNbwOU5A2fVACTPB3e0a2l8=; b=khHmGV4cnbT4Mnssc3kvSEE5rfdpHUSuuLPW44l4COTCnreAfyxITTne Wn9LwaLwQ8kgyV8lL1nUA38nqs0xFCq/GdwnP7RjXMZx/rPsAdB9AQxSY KNZuE0pU8dATj9EH6JsjAtQ8up8ySUY93cpUleWWuOsvuvaY11/5c/5QT Q=;
In-reply-to: <CC3BC5C3-80B3-4079-90E0-CA829692083F at cisco.com>
List-archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ancp>
List-help: <mailto:ancp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: Access Node Control Protocol working group mailing list <ancp.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:ancp@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp>, <mailto:ancp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp>, <mailto:ancp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4ACB5AA7.5070807 at rogers.com> <282BBE8A501E1F4DA9C775F964BB21FE3E670E7FCF at GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local> <4ACB5F01.9020709 at rogers.com> <CC3BC5C3-80B3-4079-90E0-CA829692083F at cisco.com>

including the ANCP list as others may be interested.
Francois

On 8 Oct 2009, at 16:53, Francois Le Faucheur wrote:

Hi Tom,

One question to better understand your proposal:
In http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ancp/current/msg00955.htmlyou said:"Given that that Command TLVs will be present only in a limited setof message types, and "Cmnd Nmbr" is not one of the fields definedwithin the Command TLV, I would also remove "Cmnd Nmbr" from Status-Info. It can always be specified as part of the failureresponse to aparticular message type."
I am not sure how to read that.
Are you saying that the Cmnd Nb would not appear in the GenericResponse message because if it is needed we woudl use a morespecific Response message?For the case of a negative response to a Multicast ReplicationControl message: are you proposing that the Generic Response messagebe used (and then would it not have to contain the "Cmnd Nb") or areyou saying that we would then use a new "Multicast ReplicationControl Response" which woudl contain the Cmnd Nb?
Thanks

francois


On 6 Oct 2009, at 17:15, Tom Taylor wrote:
I'm very happy to do that. Then we can discuss the result.

Maglione Roberta wrote:
Hello Tom,
in my opinion instead of submitting a new individual draftyou should update the current mcast draft and propose your changesas a new version of the draft:
draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-01
Meanwhile I can update the protocol draft with the additionalchanges that you proposed.
Best Regards,
Roberta
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Taylor [mailto:tom.taylor at rogers.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 4:57 PM
To: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP; Maglione Roberta; Wojciech Dec
Subject: Changes to ANCP multicast
I made some major proposals regarding the ANCP protocol drafts atthe end ofAugust but have had no feedback. I'm wodering if the best wayforward, given allI have in mind, is to submit a new draft-taylor-ancp-mc-extensionsincorporatingall my proposals, to serve as a basis for discussion that peoplecan relate to.
What are your views?
Tom
Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamentealle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altraazione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sonorigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documentoper errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediatacomunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione,Grazie.This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may containprivileged information intended for the addressee(s) only.Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else isunauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please deletethis message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ANCP] Changes to ANCP multicast
  - From: Tom Taylor

Prev by Date: [ANCP] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ancp-framework-12.txt
Next by Date: Re: [ANCP] Changes to ANCP multicast
Previous by thread: [ANCP] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ancp-framework-12.txt
Next by thread: Re: [ANCP] Changes to ANCP multicast
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread