Re: [PCN] Second Last Call for draft-ietf-pcn-architecture

["Georgios Karagiannis" <karagian at cs.utwente.nl>]

Hi Phil

Please see in line!
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: philip.eardley at bt.com [mailto:philip.eardley at bt.com] 
> Sent: woensdag 15 oktober 2008 12:21
> To: karagian at cs.utwente.nl; pcn at ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [PCN] Second Last Call for draft-ietf-pcn-architecture
> 
> { > Why would affected marking need a 3rd dscp? 2 dscps would 
> { > seem to leave plenty of room.
> {
> { Georgios: It depends on how the specification of the 
> encoding states { will be standardised.
> 
> Well, that's not really an answer.]
Georgios: Yes, sorry! 
Affected marking needs one additional DCSP.

> 
> { >
> { > Ok. I don't see why comment 3 (distribution of admission 
> ctrl { > functionality) applies.
> {
> { Georgios: You are right. If comment_2 is worked out, than 
> comment_3 will { also be worked out!
> {
> just to make sure I understand. If I add in comments 2 & 4, 
> then you're happy that I ignore comment 3.
> 

Georgios: Yes if you add in comments 2 & 4, then you could ignore comment 3!

Best regards,
Georgios


_______________________________________________
PCN mailing list
PCN at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn