Re: Call for the ipdvb WG to adopt: draft-fair-ipdvb-ule-02.

[Richard Lhermitte <richard.lhermitte@thales-bm.com>]

I support the adoption of the ULE draft as a WG item.

Richard



Gorry Fairhurst a écrit :

> As WG chair, I request the ipdvb list to consider whether the WG is 
> ready to support adoption of the following individual Internet Draft 
> (ID) as a WG ID. By adopting an individual ID as a working group ID, 
> this WG indicates that it intends to be develop this into an RFC, 
> according to the WG charter.
>
> WG documents should no longer be regarded as the property of the 
> individuals who originally authored them - the working group as a 
> whole must decide how they are shaped, and to see the document to a 
> successful conclusion. If adopted, the Internet Draft will be renamed 
> to start with the filename draft-ietf-ipdvb..., and will be listed on 
> the IETF web page for this WG.
>
> ---
>
>         Title           : Ultra Lightweight Encapsulation (ULE) for
>                           transmission of IP datagrams over
>                           MPEG-2/DVB networks
>         Author(s)       : G. Fairhurst, B. Collini-Nocker
>         Filename        : draft-fair-ipdvb-ule-02.txt
>         Pages           : 32
>         Date            : 2003-11-24
>
> The MPEG-2 TS has been widely accepted not only for providing digital 
> TV services, but also as a subnetwork technology for building IP 
> networks. This document describes an Ultra Lightweight Encapsulation 
> (ULE) mechanism for the transport of IPv4 and IPv6 Datagrams and other 
> network protocol packets directly over ISO MPEG- 2 Transport Streams 
> (TS) as TS Private Data.
>
> ---
>
> You are encouraged to send email to this WG, to help make the decision 
> for adoption.  Possible recommendations are:
>
>       1) Support for adoption as a working group draft under our Charter -
>       i.e. Recommend this Internet Draft SHOULD be used as the basis for
>       developing an RFC by the ipdvb WG.
>
>       2) Request for non-adoption
>       i.e. That there is (or could be) alternative approaches to
>       the problem, and that the current draft is not sufficiently
>       developed / or correctly designed ipdvb WG
>
>       3) Out of scope
>       i.e. you believe the document to be beyond the scope of the
>       approved ipdvb WG charter.
>
> Emails on this topic should be sent to the ipdvb mailing list before 
> 23rd February 2004.
>
> Note that an ID does not need to be complete to be adopted. It would 
> also be most useful to collect as many comments/criticisms as possible 
> from those reading this ID.  Looking through the archived mailing 
> list, a first list of issues to be addressed is included at the end of 
> this email.
>
> Please do help to identify any more known (or potential) issues that 
> should be addressed/discussed.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Gorry Fairhurst
> (ipdvb WG Chair)
>
> ---
>
> Known issues with draft-fair-ipdvb-ule-02.txt 
> =============================================
>
> 1) Refinement of the text on CRC generation to be unambiguous 
> (explicitly talk about the polynomial as a forward CRC-32  and THEN 
> explicitly about the computation process)
> - Text to be rewritten.
>
> 2) Query about the code point value for an Ethernet Bridging SNDU - 
> should the ULE type-field be 0x0001 ; 0x0007 as in ATM/AAL5 (as in 
> RFC2684); or should the IEEE Ethertype for bridging (0x6558) be used 
> instead?
> - Discuss on list.
>
> 3) Need to check the SNDU Packing/Padding examples in the informative 
> appendix of the ID for correctness (including the length of the last 
> packet of example A.4)
> --- any volunteers?
>
> 4) Suggestion to add an appendix to the next rev of the ID, with a 
> hexadecimal example of an SNDU, to assist implementors in validating 
> the operation of the CRC. The following example has been proposed:
>
> >> Ping6
> >> from 2001:660:3008:1789::5 to 2001:660:3008:1789::6, with the 
> >> associated DVB MAC addr being 01:02:03:04:05:06. It gives the 
> >> following SNDU :
> >>
> >> 0000:  00 3f 86 dd 01 02 03 04 05 06 60 00 00 00 00 0d  
> >> .?........`.....
> >> 0010:  3a 40 20 01 06 60 30 08 17 89 00 00 00 00 00 00  :@ ..`0.........
> >> 0020:  00 05 20 01 06 60 30 08 17 89 00 00 00 00 00 00  .. ..`0.........
> >> 0030:  00 06 80 00 9c 58 07 70 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02  .....X.p........
> >> 0040:  72 c9 c2                                         r..
> >>
> - The exact decode of this needs to be done and verified
>
> 5) ???