Hi Julien,
I agree. A New flag on the object header (WA Object, I assume that is what you
are pointing to) where we have a flag to indicate if this is fixed (WSON) or
flexi-grid is reasonable instead of creating a new object for a new Spectrum
Assignment Object.
TLVs require a bit different encoding due to the nature of additional
parameters for flexi-grid. So strict re-use of WSON TLV may not be sufficient
for some cases in flexi-grid.
Best regards,
Young
-Original Message-
From: Julien Meuric [mailto:julien.meu...@orange.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 10:28 AM
To: pce@ietf.org; draft-lee-pce-flexible-g...@ietf.org
Subject: My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid
Hi,
The discussion during the meeting suggests that I need to clarify my comment
about draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid.
This I-D is very similar to draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext, which addresses the
exact same problem over a slightly different WDM label space (running a
side-by-side diff between them appears to be very practical).
This new I-D requests the creation of one object and 3 TLVs, which are
identical to the ones created in the WSON.
As a result, I believe the latter should be reused as a starting popint.
Covering the flexi-grid case may just need to allocate new flag in the object
header to identify the WDM type we're dealing with, and document the
flexi-grid-specific assumptions (if any).
Thanks,
Julien
___
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
