[Nml-wg] NML feedback

[John MacAuley]

The more interesting problem is that the term VLAN needs to be qualified depending on the Ethernet service being offered.  For example, CE-VLAN (Customer Edge VLAN) or P-VLAN (Provider VLAN) or S-VLAN (Service VLAN), 

On 2012-07-12, at 7:38 AM, Freek Dijkstra wrote:

> Regarding the syntax:
>>> <nml:label labeltype="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet/vlan">1780</nml:label>
> 
> On 12-07-2012 13:25, Aaron Brown wrote:
> 
>> This syntax seems reasonable. My only minor niggle is i'd prefer it be
>> 'type' instead of 'labelType' since it's an attribute of a label
>> construct, and adding 'label' to it seems redundant.
> 
> Henrik suggested labelType, because "type" was an overloaded word.
> 
> I also don't like "type", because I may later propose to introduce the
> distinction between resource label, source label and destination label.
> That's also a "type".
> 
> I actually went over the GMPLS tables at
> www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-parameters/gmpls-sig-parameters.xml
> to find a better name, but got confused by all the parameters there
> (heck, I wasn't even sure that parameter I should use for a simple
> VLAN). So I used Henrik's suggestion.
> 
> Thinking about it, what is meant here is the "technology" or "encoding"
> of the label.  A quick search yieled that "label encoding" is an
> accepted term, so I propose:
> 
> <nml:label
> encoding="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/10/ethernet/vlan">1780</nml:label>
> 
> A minor drawback: we just started using "encoding" to specify the
> technology of a Port of Link. E.g. Ethernet frames. That may be
> confusing. Should be change that to "layer" or can we keep "encoding" there?
> 
> Freek
> _______________________________________________
> nml-wg mailing list
> nml-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nml-wg