Y Prasad | 3 Jul 21:42 2007
Picon

RE: ppp draft issues - offset padding field

Hi Carlos,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carlos Pignataro [mailto:cpignata <at> cisco.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 7:22 PM
> To: Y Prasad
> Cc: Ignacio Goyret; l2tpext <at> ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [L2tpext] ppp draft issues - offset padding field
> 
> 
> 
> On 6/27/2007 7:31 PM, Y Prasad said the following:
> > Thanks Carlos for explaining difference between offset size and
offset
> > capability. Please see a comment below.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Carlos Pignataro [mailto:cpignata <at> cisco.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 2:32 AM
> > To: Y Prasad
> > Cc: Ignacio Goyret; l2tpext <at> ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [L2tpext] ppp draft issues - offset padding field
> >
> >
> > Thank you for the comments, please see inline.
> >
> > On 6/27/2007 4:25 AM, Y Prasad said the following:
> >>
> >> Hi Carlos,
(Continue reading)

Carlos Pignataro | 3 Jul 22:07 2007
X-Face
Picon

Re: ppp draft issues - offset padding field

Thanks again, please see inline.

On 7/3/2007 3:42 PM, Y Prasad said the following:
> Hi Carlos,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Carlos Pignataro [mailto:cpignata <at> cisco.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 7:22 PM
>> To: Y Prasad
>> Cc: Ignacio Goyret; l2tpext <at> ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [L2tpext] ppp draft issues - offset padding field
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/27/2007 7:31 PM, Y Prasad said the following:
>>> Thanks Carlos for explaining difference between offset size and
> offset
>>> capability. Please see a comment below.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Carlos Pignataro [mailto:cpignata <at> cisco.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 2:32 AM
>>> To: Y Prasad
>>> Cc: Ignacio Goyret; l2tpext <at> ietf.org
>>> Subject: Re: [L2tpext] ppp draft issues - offset padding field
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for the comments, please see inline.
>>>
(Continue reading)

Y Prasad | 5 Jul 18:32 2007
Picon

RE: ppp draft issues - offset padding field

Agree with you Carlos.

If capability advertise mentions max size offset support, then each
session can just request offset size without any response expectation to
the avp ?
Meaning offset size avp can be request-only-no-response-needed one?
If the received size is invalid due to implementation issues of the
peer, CDN may be sent to the requesting peer.

Offset size avp can be valid for non-ppp type sessions? If so we may
define this as generic avp?

Regards
yp

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carlos Pignataro [mailto:cpignata <at> cisco.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 1:37 AM
> To: Y Prasad
> Cc: Ignacio Goyret; l2tpext <at> ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [L2tpext] ppp draft issues - offset padding field
> 
> Thanks again, please see inline.
> 
> On 7/3/2007 3:42 PM, Y Prasad said the following:
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Carlos Pignataro [mailto:cpignata <at> cisco.com]
> >> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 7:22 PM
(Continue reading)

Carlos Pignataro | 6 Jul 16:58 2007
X-Face
Picon

Re: ppp draft issues - offset padding field


On 7/5/2007 12:32 PM, Y Prasad said the following:
> Agree with you Carlos.
> 
> If capability advertise mentions max size offset support, then each
> session can just request offset size without any response expectation to
> the avp ?
> Meaning offset size avp can be request-only-no-response-needed one?
> If the received size is invalid due to implementation issues of the
> peer, CDN may be sent to the requesting peer.

Yes, exactly.

> 
> Offset size avp can be valid for non-ppp type sessions? If so we may
> define this as generic avp?

That would be outside the scope of this document, which covers only ppp.
RFC3931 or other companion documents have not defined any offset, so
it's ppp-only.

Thanks,

--Carlos.

> 
> Regards
> yp
> 
> 
(Continue reading)

Internet-Drafts | 6 Jul 17:00 2007
Picon

I-D Action:draft-ietf-l2tpext-l2tp-ppp-06.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Extensions Working Group of the IETF.

                                                                                           
        Title           : PPP Tunneling Using Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Version 3 (L2TPv3)
        Author(s)       : C. Pignataro
        Filename        : draft-ietf-l2tpext-l2tp-ppp-06.txt
        Pages           : 44
        Date            : 2007-07-06

This document describes the use of "version 3" of Layer Two Tunneling
Protocol (L2TPv3) to tunnel Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) packets.
This document defines the control protocol and encapsulation
specifics for tunneling PPP over L2TPv3, and is a companion document
to the L2TPv3 base specification.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l2tpext-l2tp-ppp-06.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to
i-d-announce-request <at> ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of 
the message.
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce
to change your subscription settings.

                                                                                           
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the 
username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After 
logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then
        "get draft-ietf-l2tpext-l2tp-ppp-06.txt".
(Continue reading)

Y Prasad | 11 Jul 13:52 2007
Picon

RE: ppp draft issues - offset padding field

Please see in-line response at <yp>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carlos Pignataro [mailto:cpignata <at> cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 8:28 PM
> To: Y Prasad
> Cc: Ignacio Goyret; l2tpext <at> ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [L2tpext] ppp draft issues - offset padding field
> 
> 
> 
> On 7/5/2007 12:32 PM, Y Prasad said the following:
> > Agree with you Carlos.
> >
> > If capability advertise mentions max size offset support, then each
> > session can just request offset size without any response
expectation to
> > the avp ?
> > Meaning offset size avp can be request-only-no-response-needed one?
> > If the received size is invalid due to implementation issues of the
> > peer, CDN may be sent to the requesting peer.
> 
> Yes, exactly.

<yp> Thanks, Carlos for the confirmation.

> 
> >
> > Offset size avp can be valid for non-ppp type sessions? If so we may
> > define this as generic avp?
(Continue reading)


Gmane