Peoples,
                  
                  
                  I am going to implement the ERO capability in our
                    path finder and want to make sure we are all on the
                    same page for how members in the order list are
                    handled.  I would also like to agree on some rules
                    for handling both strict and loose ERO.  We do not
                    differentiate between loose and strict in the
                    schema, so it really comes down to whether a path
                    finder needs to do any additional resolution to
                    satisfy the request.
                  
                  
                  For this exercise I would like to use the
                    following ports that form a valid path (I modified
                    the ESnet ports to be compliant to the new STP
                    format).  I will assume all networks support label
                    swapping.
                  
                  
                  urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:ps:sunn:1?vlan=1779-1799,3400-3499
                  urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:startap:star:1?vlan=1779-1799
                  urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:esnet?vlan=1779-1794,1797-1799
                  urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:netherlight?vlan=1779-1794,1797-1799
                  urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:production7:starlight-1?vlan=1779-1794,1797-1799
                  urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:production7:dlp01?vlan=1779-1794,1797-1799
                  
                    
                  1. A strict ERO for this path would be the
                    following (from source to destination):
                  
                  
                  urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:ps:sunn:1?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:startap:star:1?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:esnet?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:netherlight?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:production7:starlight-1?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:production7:dlp01?vlan=1779
                  
                    
                  Each fully qualified STP identifier is provided
                    from source to destination with no gaps.  In this
                    case I would like to agree on a restriction that if
                    a two edge ports on a single network are provided,
                    path finders do not try to route with anything other
                    than resources in the network (i.e. do not try to
                    connect two ports in a single network together by
                    routing out of the network and back into the
                    network).  This will stop crazy routes from
                    occurring if for any reasons those to ports cannot
                    be connected by the domain (remember my label
                    swapping solution on the A-GOLE).
                  
                  
                  2. A ERO with internal topology not contained in
                    NML:
                  
                  
                  urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:ps:sunn:1?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:internalA?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:internalB?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:internalC?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:startap:star:1?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:esnet?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:netherlight?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:production7:starlight-1?vlan=1779
                  urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:production7:dlp01?vlan=1779
                  
                  
                  In this case I also have a strict ERO based on
                    the NML topology, but for the ESnet segment I have
                    also supplied internal topology based in information
                    not known to NSI path finders.  In this case I would
                    like to agree on two restrictions for this
                    capability:
                  
                  
                  a) When specifying internal topology elements you
                    must bound them by two valid edge STP for that
                    network from within the NML topology.  In this case
                    we have bounded the internal topology elements
                    (internalA - internalC) by the STP in bold.
                  
                  
                  
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:ps:sunn:1?vlan=1779
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:internalA:1779
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:internalB:1779
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:internalC:1779
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:startap:star:1?vlan=1779
                   
                  
                  
                  This will allow path finders to perform inter
                    domain routing to the boundary STP, and pass the
                    remaining elements into the uPA for resolution.
                  
                  
                  b) When specifying internal topology elements not
                    defined in your NML they must follow the standard
                    STP format and be prefixed with the network
                    Identifier for the network in which they are
                    contained:
                  
                  
                  
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:ps:sunn:1?vlan=1779
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:internalA:1779
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:internalB:1779
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:internalC:1779
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:startap:star:1?vlan=1779
                   
                  
                  
                  Based on this rule path finders can determine the
                    ports are members of the bounded network and since
                    the internal STP are unknown, pass all internal STP
                    plus the boundary STP as an ERO to the uPA.  The
                    format of the internal STP's local part is left up
                    to the managing network just so long as it does not
                    violate the NURN character set.
                  
                  
                  3. A loose ERO is consider "loose" for two
                    reasons:
                  
                  
                  a) The ERO is not a complete end-to-end path when
                    computed using the NML topology.  For example:
                  
                  
                  
                    urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:ps:sunn:1?vlan=1779
                    urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:netherlight?vlan=1779
                    urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:production7:dlp01?vlan=1779
                   
                  
                    
                  In this case the path finder will need to
                    complete the path by selecting STP to filling in the
                    gaps, specifically at the egress SDP on the
                    ESnet/iCAIR segment.  The egress STP on the iCAIR
                    segment actually forces selection of a single STP on
                    the ingress to Netherlight, but is still considered
                    loose as the STP must be selected by the path
                    finder.
                  
                  
                  b) The ERO contains an underspecified STP.  For
                    example, the following STP are all under specified:
                  
                  
                  i) Requires any STP from the range of 1779-1794
                    to be used in the reservation request.
                  
                  
                   urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:esnet?vlan=1779-1794
                  
                  
                  ii)  Based on the EVTS service definition both
                    these underspecified STP request any valid STP from
                    the range 1779-1794,1797-1799.
                  
                  
                   urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:esnet?vlan
                   urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology:esnet
                  
                  
                  iii) When only the network identifier portion of
                    the STP is provided it implies any valid STP within
                    the network may be used.  This underspecified STP
                    format ill be utilized when a user would like a
                    specific network to be used within the path.  
                  
                  
                   urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology
                  
                  
                  For this case an ERO would be specified as
                    follows: 
                  
                  
                  
                     urn:ogf:network:es.net:2013:production:ps:sunn:1?vlan=1779
                     urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology
                     urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:production7:dlp01?vlan=1779
                   
                  
                    
                  iv) Should we support the ability to specify a
                    network and label but not a specific STP?
                  
                  
                   urn:ogf:network:icair.org:2013:topology?vlan=1779
                  
                  
                  3) If either a strict or loose ERO can not be
                    satisfied the reservation request fails and a
                    serviceException information is returned identifying
                    the constant(s) that caused the failure.
                  
                  
                  I assume I have missed some.  Can anyone think of
                    additional ones we would need to support?
                  
                  
                  Thanks,
                  John
                  
                  
                 
                _______________________________________________