+1 Jon
Cheers, Jeff On Jan 10, 2019, 2:58 AM -0800, Jonathan Hardwick <jonathan.hardw...@metaswitch.com>, wrote: > Hi Julien > > At the moment, the L bit is simply called "the L bit" (not "limit" or > "limitless") and is defined like this: > > * L: A PCC sets this bit to 1 to indicate that it does not impose > any limit on the MSD. > > Although it might be the opposite of what you'd expect, I think the > definition is nevertheless clear as it is written. > > Cheers > Jon > > -----Original Message----- > From: Julien Meuric <julien.meu...@orange.com> > Sent: Monday, 7 January, 2019 9:37 AM > To: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.i...@gmail.com> > Cc: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.i...@gmail.com>; Jonathan Hardwick > <jonathan.hardw...@metaswitch.com>; Martin Vigoureux > <martin.vigour...@nokia.com>; The IESG <i...@ietf.org>; > draft-ietf-pce-segment-rout...@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on > draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-14: (with COMMENT) > > Hi Jeff, > > You're right. I certainly don't want to change the specification, nor to add > another ambiguity. I was just looking for a mnemonic to mitigate the > confusion pointed out by Martin, to be considered between bracket (leaving > the definition as is). > Would "limit-blind" make sense? > > Cheers, > > Julien > > > On 06/01/2019 20:20, Jeff Tantsura wrote: > > Hi Julien, > > > > Happy New Year to you too. > > There’s a slight difference between limitless (e.g. unlimited) and > > limit has not been been imposed (not configured/unknown/etc). > > I think “limitless” doesn’t convey the exact meaning. In simple terms > > - if L=1, don’t use MSD as a constraint in the path computation. > > > > Thanks, > > Jeff > > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 02:28 <julien.meu...@orange.com > > <mailto:julien.meu...@orange.com>> wrote: > > > > Hi guys and happy new year! :-) > > > > Would it temper the confusion below if we added the term > > "limitless" to > > the L flag definition (section 5.1.1.)? > > > > My 2 cents, > > > > Julien > > > > > > On 21/12/2018 18:14, Jonathan Hardwick wrote: > > > I believe it is too late to change but I find L=1 meaning "no > > limit" is *very* confusing. For me L stands for Limit and when L=1 > > there is a limit, when L=0 there is none. > > > > > > [Jon] Agree, both that it is confusing and too late to change > > :-) > >
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
