Hi Jerry
In my opinion the required bit example format is already
specified in Section 4.1.
I do not think that it is usefull to duplicate the information that
is already givel elsewhere and copy it into this section.
Regarding the bit level format example, what we are willing to do
is to inlcude the following text in the Appendix A.6, instead of copying
figures from elsewhere.
"The bit level format of the RMD-QSpec is given in Section 4.1. In
particular, The Initiator/Local QSPEC bit, i.e., <I> is set to "Local"
(i.e.,
"1") and the <Qspec Proc> is set as follows:
* Message Sequence = 0: Sender initiated
* Object combination = 0: <QoS Desired> for RESERVE and
<QoS Reserved> for RESPONSE
The <QSPEC Version> used by RMD-QOSM is the default version, i.e.,
"0", see [QSP-T]. The <QSPEC Type> value used by the RMD-QOSM is
specified in [QSP-T] and is equal to: "2".
The <Traffic Handling Directives> contains the following fields:
<Traffic Handling Directives> = <PHR container> <PDR container>
The Per Hop Reservation container (PHR container) and
the Per Domain Reservation container (PDR container) are specified
in Section 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, respectively. The <PHR container>
contains the traffic handling directives for intra-domain
communication and reservation. The <PDR container> contains
additional traffic handling directives that is needed for
edge-to-edge communication. The RMD-QOSM <QoS Desired> and
<QoS Reserved>, are specified in Section 4.1.1.
In RMD-QOSM the <QoS Desired> and <QoS Reserved> objects contain the
following parameters:
<QoS Desired> = <TMOD-1> <PHB Class> <Admission Priority>
<QoS Reserved> = <TMOD-1> <PHB Class> <Admission Priority>
The bit format of the <PHB Class> (see [QSP-T] and Figure 4 and
Figure 5) and <Admission Priority> complies to the bit format
specified in [QSP-T].
Note that for this example the RMD reservation is established without an
<Admission Priority> parameter, which is equivalent to a reservation
established with an <Admission Priority> whose value is 1."
Best regards,
Georgios
On 3/22/2010, "Gerald Ash" <gash5107@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Georgios,
>
>I think it would be good to also include a bit-level example of the RMD-QSPEC, such as given in Section 4.5 of the Y.1541-QOSM draft (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nsis-y1541-qosm-10#section-4.5). For one thing, the QSPEC specification requires "at least one bit-level QSPEC example" be given for all QOSM specifications (see Section 3.1 in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nsis-qspec-24#section-3.1). Furthermore, an RMD-QSPEC example would add clarity to the RMD-QOSM specification and not be very difficult to include IMO.
>
>Thanks,
>Jerry
>
>
>
> )
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf