求http:///v_show/id_XMzUwNzEwNTc2.html?x上的背景音乐！！！~_百度知道
求http:///v_show/id_XMzUwNzEwNTc2.html?x上的背景音乐！！！~
提问者采纳
青空&果（For Tv Edit）酷狗：青空の果て望采纳，谢谢
来自团队：
其他类似问题
为您推荐：
背景音乐的相关知识
等待您来回答
下载知道APP
随时随地咨询
出门在外也不愁求第二首背景音乐http:///v_show/id_XMTk1MzUwNzQw.html_百度知道
提问者采纳
///m?f=ms&tn=baidump3&ct=&lf=&rn=&word=%D7%EE%B3%F5%B5%C4%C3%CE%CF%EB++%B7%B6%E7%E2%E7%F7++&lm=-1" target="_blank">/m.baidu://mp3最初的梦想 - 范玮琪
<a href="http
其他类似问题
为您推荐：
背景音乐的相关知识
其他1条回答
1楼正解！~~~
等待您来回答
下载知道APP
随时随地咨询
出门在外也不愁http:&#47;&#47;&#47;v_show&#47;id_XMTk1MzUwNzQw.html这是什么歌_百度知道
http:&#47;&#47;&#47;v_show&#47;id_XMTk1MzUwNzQw.html这是什么歌
提问者采纳
零点乐队 - 相信自己试听
其他类似问题
为您推荐：
youku的相关知识
等待您来回答
下载知道APP
随时随地咨询
出门在外也不愁From ggbfd@ Wed Nov 01 23:43:13 2006
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GfUPi-A
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Wed, 01 Nov :50 -0500
Received: from [202.155.99.150] (helo=)
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GfUJb-0007OL-92
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Wed, 01 Nov :36 -0500
Date: Thu, 2 Dec :29 -0420
From: "Gavin Flint"
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.0.2.2 Rush) Professional
Reply-To: "Gavin Flint"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID:
To: isis-archive@lists.ietf.org
Subject: Inside news
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/ charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 3.9 (+++)
X-Scan-Signature: 52f7ac7b36bda
were ready to move into the New Market Street home. Henry W and the sidewalks were of red brick, and always damp and cool. Indoor, and thin, white marble trimmings outlining the front door andintensely. When his father explained to him how it was mined, he dreamedThe growth of young Frank Algernon Cowperwood was through years of what
BMSN.OB could show to be one of the LARGEST stem cell reserve plays for the month of November! Why?
Bio-Matrix Scientific Group Inc.
No controversy with stem cells from fat or cord blood.
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Company name: Bio-Matrix Scientific Group Inc.
Stock symbol: BMSN.OB
Average volume: 14,492.4
Current cost: 1.50
Potential value: 2.22 (+48% Income)
Prospect: MAX
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Buy that stock symbol and you can double or triple your investments . Buy it because the price is still little. Don't waste, away that perfect opportunity. You can see the every month price of that stock symbol on Nasdaq and the price was 2.10-2.05 in October. After the publishing of the news the price will significally increase and it can be up to 2.22$. Please examine this news attentively and make a correct decision:
===================================
Mature stem cell biotechs: better prospects, less argument Any minute BMSN's ability will get authorization to open!
This will be an unbelievable moment.
This information was released Bio-Matrix Scientific Group Inc.
Processing Laboratory Nearing Completion (Go to yahoo or any economic site to read this information now)
We could be looking at something absolutely incredible about to happen.
The CEO has affirmed that as far as he knows this will be the first Stem Cell from heavy storage facility. They will also store cord blood. This will be a major flash for BMSN. Everyone will have the chance to store Adult Stem Cells from heavy and cord blood. Go to MSNBC and put in Adult Stem Cells from Fat. Watch the miracles happen. No argument. No destroying embryos. This is incredible. Watch this Company like a hawk. Low drift Corporation. Could be a big mover.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Go BMSN.OB! Take that pleasant stock to your portfolio. This stock is just perfect as a middle term investment.
dis.claimer
All material herein was prepared based upon information believed to
be reliable. The information contained herein is not guaranteed to
be accurate, and should not be considered to be all-inclusive. The
company that is discussed in this opinion have not approved the
statements made in this opinion. This opinion contains forward-
looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. This
material is for informational purposes only and should not be
construed as an offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell
securities. We are not a licensed broker, broker dealer, market
maker, investment banker, investment advisor, analyst or
underwriter. Please consult a broker before purchasing or selling
any securities viewed or mentioned herein. We are expecting to
receive cash no amount has been decided on..We will report on
compensation as soon as we finalize the price. These stocks are
highly violatile, and you can lose all your money. They can trade
very high and we suggest if you are not a
savvy investor you sit back and watch.
what stocks were, and why they fluctuated in value. He began towindows. There were trees in the street--plenty of them. The roadwere not worth the paper they were written on, and that others wereand trustworthy individual.In this progress of his father young Cowperwood definitely shared. He
From isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org Fri Nov 03 08:13:55 2006
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GfyqD-0005m3-Ld; Fri, 03 Nov :13 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GfcX2-0004lp-5G; Thu, 02 Nov :56 -0500
Received: from p-mail1. ([195.101.245.15])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GfcWh-0004wL-1i; Thu, 02 Nov :56 -0500
Received: from ftrdmel1.rd.francetelecom.fr ([10.193.117.152]) by
ftrdsmtp1.rd.francetelecom.fr with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.);
Thu, 2 Nov :28 +0100
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Subject: RE: [mpls] RE: [Isis-wg] CCAMP Working group last
callondraft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-02.txt
Date: Thu, 2 Nov :28 +0100
Message-ID:
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [mpls] RE: [Isis-wg] CCAMP Working group last
callondraft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-02.txt
Thread-Index: Acb1DSpF4zoRNfWVS4+Sz26C3QSaHQAlAJrgAjfffRA=
From: "LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN"
To: "Les Ginsberg \(ginsberg\)" , ,
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Nov :28.0998 (UTC)
FILETIME=[F1F10A60:01C6FE81]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: f49c97cea2d36a99eef8c
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 03 Nov :12 -0500
Cc: routing-discussion@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Errors-To: isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org
Sorry for this late answer.
Thanks for your comments, please see inline,=20
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:]=20
> Envoy=E9 : dimanche 22 octobre
> =C0 : zzx-adrian@olddog.co. isis-wg@ietf. ospf@ietf.=20
> mpls@lists.ietf.org
> Cc : routing-discussion@ietf.org
> Objet : [mpls] RE: [Isis-wg] CCAMP Working group last=20
> callondraft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-02.txt=20
> In regards to the IS-IS definitions, there is (again - sorry=20
> JP...) confusion in the use of the terms TLV and subTLV.
> For example, in Section 2 it states:
> A new TLV is defined for ISIS and OSPF: the TE Node Capability=20
Descriptor TLV, to be carried within:=20
- The ISIS Capability TLV ([ISIS-CAP]) for ISIS...
> If the information is carried within another TLV, then it is=20
> clearly subTLV information - the difference between the two=20
> is more than terminology since it impacts both the encoding=20
> and the scope of the identifiers which are assigned.
> Section 4.2 then goes on to discuss:
> "The format of the IS-IS TE Node Capability TLV" - which is,=20
> as pointed out above, actually a subTLV.
> And then goes on to define "subsubTLVs" (which are=20
> incorrectly called subTLVs).
> As "subsubTLVs" are new to IS-IS encoding some discussion of=20
> this added level of hierarchy is required. However, I think=20
> it might also be fair to entertain the possibility that the=20
> "TE Node Capability subTLV" be deleted and the "subsubTLVs"=20
> defined in the subsections of 4.2 be defined more directly as=20
> subTLVs of the IS-IS CAPs TLV. This is possible because as=20
> currently defined, the "TE Node Capability subTLV" has no=20
> information at the subTLV level - it is simply a container=20
> for the subsubTLV information. This would allow for a more=20
> efficient encoding without any loss of functionality.
Thanks for pointing this out, we are going to delete the TE Node Cap =
level and define the Control Plane Cap and Data plane Cap as sub-TLVs of =
the ISIS Capability TLV.
> Whatever the resolution, all the text relating to this must=20
> be reworded to be consistent and accurate.
OK will be done
> I would also prefer that the wording of the following=20
> sentence in Section 5.2:
> "An empty TE Node Capability Descriptor MUST be discarded."
> be changed to
> "An empty TE Node Capability Descriptor MUST be ignored."
> The term "discard" suggests that a router which leaks a CAP=20
> TLV containing TE node capability information might be=20
> required to modify the contents of that TLV - which is=20
> something to be avoided.
OK, the text will be updated as per your proposal.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk]
> > Sent: Saturday, October 21,
> > To: isis-wg@ietf. ospf@ietf. mpls@lists.ietf.org
> > Cc: Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS; routing-discussion@ietf.org
> > Subject: [Isis-wg] CCAMP Working group last call
> ondraft-ietf-ccamp-te-
> > node-cap-02.txt
> > Heads up.
> > The CCAMP working group is holding a working group last=20
> call on this=20
> > draft.
> > Your input is invited.
> > Please send comments direct to the CCAMP mailing list or to the WG
> > (Deborah and/or me) if you are not subscribed to CCAMP.
> > Thanks,
> > Adrian
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Adrian Farrel"
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 17,
> > Subject: Working group last call on
> draft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-02.txt
> > > This starts a two week working group last on
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-c
> > > Please send your comments to the CCAMP mailing list by 12 midnight
> > > on Monday 30th October
> > > Thanks,
> > > Adrian and Deborah
> > _______________________________________________
> > Isis-wg mailing list
> > Isis-wg@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
Fri Nov 03 10:24:53 2006
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gg0ub-0001SN-BG
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Fri, 03 Nov :53 -0500
Received: from f54087.upc-f.chello.nl ([80.56.54.87])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gg0uU-00089i-At
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Fri, 03 Nov :51 -0500
From: "June Begay"
Subject: 75% day profit.
Date: Fri, 3 Dec :40 -0060
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/ charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 3.2 (+++)
X-Scan-Signature: 97adf206bdb5a27b217034
place for a boy to live. It contained mostly small two and three-storybanking-houses, he had come to be familiar with and favorably known in
FACT CORP CL A (FCTOA.OB)
Get Ready!! FCTOA continues!
Don't you dare take your eyes off this morning.
When this St0ck moves... LOOK OUT!...
Stock sign: FCTOA.OB
Corporation name: FACT CORP
Present cost: 0.76
1 year price increase: 500%
1 month price increase: 145%
5 day price increase: 59%
This is a ideal stock sign to double or triple your investment. It is just a peace of cake for every investor.
Check the stock history on Nasdaq and you won't have any doubts about that stock.
About FACT Corporation
FACT Company develops, licenses and markets proprietary nutrition solutions to commercial clients through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Food & Culinary Technology Group Inc. ("FACT Group"). FACT Group serves commercial bakery operators that produce and deal out useful baked goods (such as muffins, bagels, cookies and brownies) designed for a rapidly-growing consumer marketplace focused on class, taste and nutrition. These goods are marketed via both conservative and alternative distribution channels, including branded and private-label trade chance, as well as foodservice and opportunities markets.
Buy it now cause tommorow the price will be upper!
windows. There were trees in the street--plenty of them. The roadall the money they received. His father, pleased at his interest, and the sidewalks were of red brick, and always damp and cool. In
Mon Nov 06 13:19:37 2006
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gh94L-00006x-7U
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Mon, 06 Nov :37 -0500
Received: from stsc1260-eth-s1-s1p1-vip. ([156.154.16.129] helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gh94L-M
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Mon, 06 Nov :37 -0500
Received: from host50-163-dynamic.55-82-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([82.55.163.50] helo=zzfu79a1odso591)
by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gh94F-0007Ie-0X
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Mon, 06 Nov :35 -0500
Date: Mon, 6 Dec :36 -0060
From: Flowerland HR department
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.0.0.8) Professional
Reply-To: gaefe
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID:
To: isis-archive@lists.ietf.org
Subject: Employees wanted! - work from home
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/ charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 4.9 (++++)
X-Scan-Signature: a27abcc044eaa15befcaa87
_______________________________________________
> I-D-Announce mailing list
> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
From isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org Wed Nov 22 11:59:27 2006
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GmvQu-0004fY-VX; Wed, 22 Nov :48 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GmvQs-0004fD-ME
for isis-wg@ietf. Wed, 22 Nov :46 -0500
Received: from kremlin.juniper.net ([207.17.137.120])
by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GmvQr-0007Ox-CU
for isis-wg@ietf. Wed, 22 Nov :46 -0500
Received: from unknown (HELO beta.jnpr.net) ([172.24.18.109])
by kremlin.juniper.net with ESMTP; 22 Nov :43 -0800
X-IronPort-AV: i="4.09,448,";
d="scan'208"; a=":sNHT"
Received: from [10.8.0.10] ([172.26.24.52]) by beta.jnpr.net over TLS secured
channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.);
Wed, 22 Nov :39 -0800
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 22 Nov :27 +0100
From: Hannes Gredler
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adrian Farrel
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-isis-rfc4205bis-00.txt
References:
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type: text/ charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Nov :40.0359 (UTC)
FILETIME=[75BCA770:01C70E57]
X-Spam-Score: 0.9 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660fac1d8d5e3ab
Cc: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Errors-To: isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org
my guess is that the significant change is this:
-Kompella & Rekhter
Informational
+Kompella & Rekhter
Standards Track
Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Can someone let us know what is happening here?
> I don't see any discussion of this on the mailing list either before or
> after submission, and I can't spot any differences between the RFC and
> the content of this I-D.
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
From xprkyed@ccs-co. Wed Nov 22 13:06:26 2006
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GmwUM-0008Pc-6R
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Wed, 22 Nov :26 -0500
Received: from [200.27.53.42] (helo=[200.27.53.42])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GmwUH-0006mr-SQ
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Wed, 22 Nov :26 -0500
From: "bloggers"
To: isis-archive@lists.ietf.org
Subject: Christmas Special!
Date: Wed, 22 Nov :20 -0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_E69.4B717470"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
Thread-Index: AccOaUtxrB5ARFz/RdSNC1ADi06ZNQ==
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.
Message-Id:
X-Spam-Score: 3.2 (+++)
X-Scan-Signature: b15b147c75ae
------=_NextPart_000_E69.4B717470
Content-Type: text/
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>> Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-
>>>> lsps-02.txt
>>>> Date: Fri, 01 Sep :10 +0200
>>>> From: Loa Andersson
>>>> Organization: Acreo AB
>>>> To: mpls@ietf.org
>>>> Working Group,
>>>> this initiates a two week working group last call on
>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt
>>>> The wg last call ends on September 17.
>>>> Please send comments to the working group mailing list and/or
>>>> the working group chairs.
>>>> /Loa and George
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
Thu Nov 30 01:29:00 2006
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GpfPo-0007gu-M2
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Thu, 30 Nov :00 -0500
Received: from [219.135.12.229] (helo=[219.135.12.229])
by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GpfPn-0006qW-02
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Thu, 30 Nov :00 -0500
To: isis-archive@lists.ietf.org
Subject: re: john Doe is back
Date: Thu, 30 Nov :47 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_8B.D8B6D960"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
Thread-Index: AccUi9i2LF0Q6z+TTay6kwUedDArVA==
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.
Message-Id:
X-Spam-Score: 3.9 (+++)
X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6ef32
------=_NextPart_000_8B.D8B6D960
Content-Type: text/
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>>> Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on
>>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt
>>>>> Date: Fri, 01 Sep :10 +0200
>>>>> From: Loa Andersson
>>>>> Organization: Acreo AB
>>>>> To: mpls@ietf.org
>>>>> Working Group,
>>>>> this initiates a two week working group last call on
>>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt
>>>>> The wg last call ends on September 17.
>>>>> Please send comments to the working group mailing list and/or
>>>>> the working group chairs.
>>>>> /Loa and George
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
Thu Nov 30 13:38:01 2006
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GpqnJ-0004PO-EP
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Thu, 30 Nov :01 -0500
Received: from [86.120.16.194] (helo=[86.120.16.194])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GpqnH-0003Ga-46
for isis-archive@lists.ietf. Thu, 30 Nov :01 -0500
From: "describe tension"
To: isis-archive@lists.ietf.org
Subject: re: Burbank
Date: Wed, 15 Nov :17 -0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_F6.F5701990"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
Thread-Index: AccI9vVwO1ERIhHDRW6VrpCfa+MxnA==
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.
Message-Id:
X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++)
X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6ef32
------=_NextPart_000_F6.F5701990
Content-Type: text/
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>>>> Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-
>>>>>> lsps-02.txt
>>>>>> Date: Fri, 01 Sep :10 +0200
>>>>>> From: Loa Andersson
>>>>>> Organization: Acreo AB
>>>>>> To: mpls@ietf.org
>>>>>> Working Group,
>>>>>> this initiates a two week working group last call on
>>>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt
>>>>>> The wg last call ends on September 17.
>>>>>> Please send comments to the working group mailing list and/or
>>>>>> the working group chairs.
>>>>>> /Loa and George
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
From isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org Thu Nov 30 14:32:38 2006
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1GpreA-00076V-0N; Thu, 30 Nov :38 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gpre8-00074t-Ue; Thu, 30 Nov :36 -0500
Received: from sj-iport- ([171.68.10.87])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gpre7-0001bJ-Bi; Thu, 30 Nov :36 -0500
Received: from rtp-dkim- ([64.102.121.159])
by sj-iport- with ESMTP; 30 Nov :34 -0800
Received: from rtp-core- (rtp-core- [64.102.124.12])
by rtp-dkim- (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id kAUJWXhN024136;
Thu, 30 Nov :33 -0500
Received: from xbh-rtp-211. (xbh-rtp-
[64.102.31.102])
by rtp-core- (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id kAUJWXYN016309;
Thu, 30 Nov :33 -0500 (EST)
Received: from xfe-rtp-201. ([64.102.31.38]) by
xbh-rtp-211. with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.);
Thu, 30 Nov :33 -0500
Received: from [10.82.224.37] ([10.82.224.37]) by xfe-rtp-201.
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.);
Thu, 30 Nov :33 -0500
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 30 Nov :32 -0500
From: Acee Lindem
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: JP Vasseur
References:
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type: text/ charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Nov :33.0263 (UTC)
FILETIME=[4847FFF0:01C714B6]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/ l=5083; t=;
x=; c=relaxed/ s=rtpdkim2001;
h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-V
z=From:=20Acee=20Lindem=20
|Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Fwd=3A=20[mpls]=20WG=20Last=20Call=20on=20draft-ietf
-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt] |Sender:=20
|To:=20JP=20Vasseur=20;
bh=Ck1ZzJRmpGyNAUg/g4HrySDgyo+nOY3C4aL7iYDBsMk=;
b=J8hWVLsd0zkk1ztbZSVIXR5hBDAjHl3a1lN9j8drcsSR8Rb9sgYQ+zgx0uhprW3/U2vLLNer
LYsrPvmz8zf4FTrNopmiRs+vCPDOdSb9Lcul5qi4ayvuaKxHO/T6Qcl8;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=; dkim=pass (s
ig /rtpdkim2001 );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 33cc095b503dae553cf1
Cc: George Swallow , rtg-dir@ietf.org, isis-wg@ietf.org,
ospf@ietf.org, Loa Andersson
Subject: [Isis-wg] Re: [Fwd: [mpls] WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt]
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Errors-To: isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org
JP - Sounds good.
JP Vasseur wrote:
> Hi Acee,
> On Nov 30, 2006, at 11:56 AM, Acee Lindem wrote:
>> Looks good. See one question below.
>> JP Vasseur wrote:
>>> Hi Acee,
>>> Thanks for your comments -
>>> As soon as you ACK that the changes address your comments I'll post
>>> the updated ID.
>>> see in line,
>>> On Oct 10, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Acee Lindem wrote:
>>>> One more comment - Please write the document so that it can
>>>> apply to OSPFv3 TE as well. The existing draft can be an informative
>>>> reference (draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-traffic-07.txt)
>>> OK. Text added:
The Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) sub-TLV is OPTIONAL and MUST
appear at most once within the Link TLV (Type 2) that is itself
carried within the Traffic Engineering LSA specified in
>>> [RFC3630]. If
a second instance of the Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) sub-TLV is
present, the receiving system MUST only process the first
>>> instance of
the sub-TLV.
The Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) sub-TLV is OPTIONAL and MUST
appear at most once within the Link TLV (Type 2) that is itself
carried within the OSPFv2 Traffic Engineering LSA specified in
>>> [RFC3630]
or the OSPFv3 Intra-Area-TE LSA (function code 10) defined in
>>> draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-traffic.
If a second instance of the Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s)
>>> sub-TLV is
present, the receiving system MUST only process the first
>>> instance of
the sub-TLV.
>>> see below
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Acee Lindem wrote:
>>>>> I've reviewed the subject document and don't have any comments on it
>>>>> from the perspective of the OSPF WG. However, I have the following
>>>>> comments as a member of the routing directorate (copying JP):
1. Why the cryptic sub-TLV name? RFC 3630 doesn't define short
cryptic names for sub-TLVs so I don't really see why you've
>>>>> defined
NB-0-BW-LSP? Why not just call it the Unconstrained LSP
>>>>> Count sub-TLV?
Or at least come up with a better short name :^),
>>>>> BW-0-LSP-CNT.
>>> Yes, no problem. I-)
>>> Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) sub-TLV.
2. How did you arrive at 19 for the suggested value for the
>>>>> sub-TLV type? I checked
IANA and 18 is the next available. I may be missing a
>>>>> document though.
>>> As documented, 18 looks the next one available (when I first wrote
>>> the ID I vaguely remember having seen another ID using 18 but I'm
>>> not quite sure). Let's propose 18 and will see with IANA.
you want to reserve a value (e.g., 0xffffffff) to
>>>>> indicate no unconstrained
LSPs are to traverse a given link.
>>> Let's just use the value 0.
>> Since this is the current number wouldn't there be ambiguity between
>> designating there
>> are currently no BW-0 LSPs traversing this link and no BW-0 LSPs are
>> allowed
>> to traverse this linke?
> Other attributes such as affinity should be used to not allows 0-bw TE
> LSP to traverse a specific link. This TLV is only used to report the
> number of such TE LSPs traversing the link.
>> Thanks,
4. Nit - in section 4, replace "OSPF LSA" with "OSPF LSAs" and
>>>>> "ISIS LSP"
with "ISIS LSPs".
>>> Thanks.
>>> Cheers.
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Acee
David Ward wrote:
>>>>>> Do you want our WG to review? Co-Last Call (as we have for other
>>>>>> WG that
>>>>>> affect our protocol)? Do you have a desired date for end of last
>>>>>> call from
>>>>>> the IGPs?
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> -DWard
>>>>>> On 9/4/06 5:01 AM, "Loa Andersson"
>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>> the MPLS working group want to notify the ospf and is-s
>>>>>>> working groups, as well as the routing directorate that
>>>>>>> we are currently doing a wg last call on
>>>>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt.
>>>>>>> Loa and George
>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>> Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on
>>>>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt
>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 01 Sep :10 +0200
>>>>>>> From: Loa Andersson
>>>>>>> Organization: Acreo AB
>>>>>>> To: mpls@ietf.org
>>>>>>> Working Group,
>>>>>>> this initiates a two week working group last call on
>>>>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt
>>>>>>> The wg last call ends on September 17.
>>>>>>> Please send comments to the working group mailing list and/or
>>>>>>> the working group chairs.
>>>>>>> /Loa and George
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
From isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org Thu Nov 30 14:34:46 2006
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gprg9-00006e-Su; Thu, 30 Nov :41 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gprg8-00005M-00; Thu, 30 Nov :40 -0500
Received: from sj-iport- ([171.68.10.87])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gprg6-0001ql-Dl; Thu, 30 Nov :39 -0500
Received: from rtp-dkim- ([64.102.121.158])
by sj-iport- with ESMTP; 30 Nov :37 -0800
Received: from rtp-core- (rtp-core- [64.102.124.12])
by rtp-dkim- (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id kAUJYatM022987;
Thu, 30 Nov :36 -0500
Received: from xbh-rtp-201. (xbh-rtp-
[64.102.31.12])
by rtp-core- (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id kAUJYaYV017791;
Thu, 30 Nov :36 -0500 (EST)
Received: from xfe-rtp-202. ([64.102.31.21]) by
xbh-rtp-201. with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.);
Thu, 30 Nov :23 -0500
Received: from [10.86.104.179] ([10.86.104.179]) by xfe-rtp-202.
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.);
Thu, 30 Nov :22 -0500
In-Reply-To:
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
Content-Type: text/ charset=US-ASCII; delsp= format=flowed
Message-Id:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: JP Vasseur
Date: Thu, 30 Nov :21 -0500
To: Acee Lindem
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Nov :22.0614 (UTC)
FILETIME=[C714B6]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/ l=5449; t=;
x=; c=relaxed/ s=rtpdkim1001;
h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-V
z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20
|Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Fwd=3A=20[mpls]=20WG=20Last=20Call=20on=20draft-ietf
-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt] |Sender:=20
|To:=20Acee=20Lindem=20;
bh=LpEJ/OeHhHrpUdSUU7/QMglN5zxCu8nPzZSRVo0ZI+w=;
b=HpcxUTDTUMS3NiMEGSjBtoGtdQ0ptPFv00rvdTD0im5CMb6LXTpY/gDHPClrEZSSZ+Zv39mQ
1JKDDWfiJ4vDrq4qusK2OVU/qcApW+Bh2cbydMVbLURw0uU3kxFzjCv9;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=; dkim=pass (
sig /rtpdkim1001 );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: fa9ed783
Cc: George Swallow , rtg-dir@ietf.org, isis-wg@ietf.org,
ospf@ietf.org, Loa Andersson
Subject: [Isis-wg] Re: [Fwd: [mpls] WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt]
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Errors-To: isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org
OK thanks so I'll now post the revised version.
On Nov 30, 2006, at 2:32 PM, Acee Lindem wrote:
> JP - Sounds good.
> JP Vasseur wrote:
>> Hi Acee,
>> On Nov 30, 2006, at 11:56 AM, Acee Lindem wrote:
>>> Hi JP,
>>> Looks good. See one question below.
>>> JP Vasseur wrote:
>>>> Hi Acee,
>>>> Thanks for your comments -
>>>> As soon as you ACK that the changes address your comments I'll
>>>> post the updated ID.
>>>> see in line,
>>>> On Oct 10, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Acee Lindem wrote:
>>>>> One more comment - Please write the document so that it can
>>>>> apply to OSPFv3 TE as well. The existing draft can be an
>>>>> informative
>>>>> reference (draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-traffic-07.txt)
>>>> OK. Text added:
The Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) sub-TLV is OPTIONAL and MUST
appear at most once within the Link TLV (Type 2) that is itself
carried within the Traffic Engineering LSA specified in
>>>> [RFC3630]. If
a second instance of the Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) sub-
>>>> TLV is
present, the receiving system MUST only process the first
>>>> instance of
the sub-TLV.
The Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) sub-TLV is OPTIONAL and MUST
appear at most once within the Link TLV (Type 2) that is itself
carried within the OSPFv2 Traffic Engineering LSA specified
>>>> in [RFC3630]
or the OSPFv3 Intra-Area-TE LSA (function code 10) defined in
>>>> draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-traffic.
If a second instance of the Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s)
>>>> sub-TLV is
present, the receiving system MUST only process the first
>>>> instance of
the sub-TLV.
>>>> see below
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Acee
>>>>> Acee Lindem wrote:
>>>>>> I've reviewed the subject document and don't have any comments
>>>>>> on it
>>>>>> from the perspective of the OSPF WG. However, I have the
>>>>>> following
>>>>>> comments as a member of the routing directorate (copying JP):
1. Why the cryptic sub-TLV name? RFC 3630 doesn't define short
cryptic names for sub-TLVs so I don't really see why
>>>>>> you've defined
NB-0-BW-LSP? Why not just call it the Unconstrained LSP
>>>>>> Count sub-TLV?
Or at least come up with a better short name :^),
>>>>>> BW-0-LSP-CNT.
>>>> Yes, no problem. I-)
>>>> Number of 0-bandwidth TE LSP(s) sub-TLV.
2. How did you arrive at 19 for the suggested value for the
>>>>>> sub-TLV type? I checked
IANA and 18 is the next available. I may be missing a
>>>>>> document though.
>>>> As documented, 18 looks the next one available (when I first
>>>> wrote the ID I vaguely remember having seen another ID using 18
>>>> but I'm not quite sure). Let's propose 18 and will see with IANA.
you want to reserve a value (e.g., 0xffffffff) to
>>>>>> indicate no unconstrained
LSPs are to traverse a given link.
>>>> Let's just use the value 0.
>>> Since this is the current number wouldn't there be ambiguity
>>> between designating there
>>> are currently no BW-0 LSPs traversing this link and no BW-0 LSPs
>>> are allowed
>>> to traverse this linke?
>> Other attributes such as affinity should be used to not allows 0-
>> bw TE LSP to traverse a specific link. This TLV is only used to
>> report the number of such TE LSPs traversing the link.
>> Thanks.
>>> Thanks,
4. Nit - in section 4, replace "OSPF LSA" with "OSPF LSAs"
>>>>>> and "ISIS LSP"
with "ISIS LSPs".
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> Cheers.
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Acee
David Ward wrote:
>>>>>>> Do you want our WG to review? Co-Last Call (as we have for
>>>>>>> other WG that
>>>>>>> affect our protocol)? Do you have a desired date for end of
>>>>>>> last call from
>>>>>>> the IGPs?
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -DWard
>>>>>>> On 9/4/06 5:01 AM, "Loa Andersson"
>>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>> the MPLS working group want to notify the ospf and is-s
>>>>>>>> working groups, as well as the routing directorate that
>>>>>>>> we are currently doing a wg last call on
>>>>>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt.
>>>>>>>> Loa and George
>>>>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>>>>> Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-
>>>>>>>> te-lsps-02.txt
>>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 01 Sep :10 +0200
>>>>>>>> From: Loa Andersson
>>>>>>>> Organization: Acreo AB
>>>>>>>> To: mpls@ietf.org
>>>>>>>> Working Group,
>>>>>>>> this initiates a two week working group last call on
>>>>>>>> draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt
>>>>>>>> The wg last call ends on September 17.
>>>>>>>> Please send comments to the working group mailing list and/or
>>>>>>>> the working group chairs.
>>>>>>>> /Loa and George
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
From isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org Thu Nov 30 20:53:54 2006
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gpxak-00020B-3T; Thu, 30 Nov :30 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gpxaj-0001wm-5o; Thu, 30 Nov :29 -0500
Received: from sj-iport- ([171.68.10.87])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Gpxah-0007nm-Sa; Thu, 30 Nov :29 -0500
Received: from rtp-dkim- ([64.102.121.158])
by sj-iport- with ESMTP; 30 Nov :27 -0800
Received: from rtp-core- (rtp-core- [64.102.124.13])
by rtp-dkim- (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id kB11rQRw030038;
Thu, 30 Nov :26 -0500
Received: from xbh-rtp-211. (xbh-rtp-
[64.102.31.102])
by rtp-core- (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id kB11rQDM020910;
Thu, 30 Nov :26 -0500 (EST)
Received: from xfe-rtp-202. ([64.102.31.21]) by
xbh-rtp-211. with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.);
Thu, 30 Nov :25 -0500
Received: from [10.86.104.179] ([10.86.104.179]) by xfe-rtp-202.
with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.);
Thu, 30 Nov :25 -0500
In-Reply-To:
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
Content-Type: text/ charset=US-ASCII; delsp= format=flowed
Message-Id:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: JP Vasseur
Date: Thu, 30 Nov :21 -0500
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Dec :25.0540 (UTC)
FILETIME=[7D4CBE40:01C714EB]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/ l=1224; t=;
x=; c=relaxed/ s=rtpdkim1001;
h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-V
z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20
|Subject:=20Re=3A=20[OSPF]=20Re=3A=20[Fwd=3A=20[mpls]=20WG=20Last=20Call=
20on=20draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt]=20
|Sender:=20 |To:=;
bh=BPd12xBa+zoogHIUHSGXIoNHXmlxfeVqo2nFkl4ftu4=;
b=eF4MHklYLO/qAFxc2g6ArfpIJNA1nRibHI6GRLjR9VdSSbqkgCQZ/W1vcEpiwyjhIeOldCvx
ypI7CpmHKdQH8uMGnOMaRYFtVuyF9Vbk9AvmhCVadFfuYhRoLRaPbs/W;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=; dkim=pass (
sig /rtpdkim1001 );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 39bd8f8cbb76cae18b7e23f7cf6b2b9f
Cc: George Swallow , rtg-dir@ietf.org, isis-wg@ietf.org,
ospf@ietf.org, Loa Andersson , Acee Lindem
Subject: [Isis-wg] Re: [OSPF] Re: [Fwd: [mpls] WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt]
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Errors-To: isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org
Hi Curtis,
On Nov 30, 2006, at 8:48 PM, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
> In message
> JP Vasseur writes:
>> Other attributes such as affinity should be used to not allows 0-bw
>> TE LSP to traverse a specific link. This TLV is only used to report
>> the number of such TE LSPs traversing the link.
>> Thanks.
> The provider already has the necessary tools that can be used to
> accomplish this.
If a general purpose tool (attributes and
> affinities) is available which accomplishes something a special
> purpose tool to accomplish the same thing is not needed.
> Such a tool would only be useful if the administration of the MPLS
> midpoint (where the attribute is set) had no control over the
> administration of the MPLS ingress or a border that is doing route
> computation (where the affinity is set).
I don't see any anticipated
> real world deployment that would benefit from this.
If you do, then
> please explain the deployment scenario.
not sure to see your point here ... I was mentioning that the aim of
this TLV was not to avoid some links.
Looks like you're saying the same thing.
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg}