[babel] Shephard's review of draft-ietf-babel-mac-relaxed-03

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Tue, 22 November 2022 01:55 UTC

Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8087C157B40 for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:55:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.845
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.845 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id feahB2sV73WF for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:55:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x62b.google.com (mail-ej1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C48DDC14F5E1 for <babel@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:55:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id bj12so32461590ejb.13 for <babel@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:55:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=p8R/qxa3U/RRvo/Nb4MPHRj2iuTxdVRXsOpJpT0mQi4=; b=cY/dFdXc8uGOEd20/MR4itoWvkDVA6Q2obvj/RKp8mYSYk5qVV4L4o/89TOu/YgwIF KtyZl7hbBSQtueSJGnmID2j10ECcZDO6kcFWV9GiRRxCogP/Qx+vO06eoretkWa9dO9E td/cP3rHqXskXRZ2L0ngb1dDqsOhRe6UHLe+b3TiDmHJ/6/ucYPXTdm7MDrUQi6B4eIr 97Hb2ovlCLJzjRvtOOT6oRYBjBR6wyaa2W0fXd+PaMAZJJ20S5RGReo7Pj6Nm+YIp/VX d6jio5BSF/Bn4ybcVmnyz7L5UR2k0DpJP3Yuhs6FGmC7Y2ogQHZoCNPoaZ78OvA11lw2 fTiA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=p8R/qxa3U/RRvo/Nb4MPHRj2iuTxdVRXsOpJpT0mQi4=; b=CeOVcY1Dd2T1HHMrw4LDRVXW70gBzkAMwB2CqcJk9dO5IdztQARi9DEtcbMdC7CpRo MJerD12G9qnYAyu9uzlvycZyfEO89ItJ4yet/QGuuwNFmog+NAvDbumoOPNlbcneGzFv 7omqbI7In0MVoYLyQnLNbWKBkiXu3llAqAw899ZwifiuLc9pH27tOqx8YbqmhSe9ylvc yeTDR4vY6j6+cgaSPzoSFEICcLkJ9TLw3OY6dHsnDZxRkppJ0bRxSNGpI5BIiQiEHqoa bNe5W+o2iNOZMXYBi9m0BeQZ6co3vFgv5XaS0k3rHTugzciFpE4SScKYzosf9s4RWE8J ToCw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pnfxTf+1tN87lx0snm3ky1+dC5g8XKm4W6ucHpQqocUDB+5TJUk fl5ptIbcxWiNXM1EgtesfEAQhJmUHEORlUFJ51xEFY0o
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf4lWuY1ynhHiGp9hHkFWm6YAio4POoWaodih4hvudRRbVa5xNnpSC2vIF9dcFVbVg2tcYOcghikunRFd0hOBlI=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:9c0a:b0:7ae:1e53:8dd4 with SMTP id ld10-20020a1709079c0a00b007ae1e538dd4mr17359855ejc.42.1669082143981; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:55:43 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 20:55:31 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEEGr=GNi4qnzqK7_HFdGdXJfcEx-MLTDRWVsCrw2_5b6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Babel at IETF <babel@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/HQjK4TKnEqC-yI8YPt3De5QOm2g>
Subject: [babel] Shephard's review of draft-ietf-babel-mac-relaxed-03
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <babel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/>
List-Post: <mailto:babel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2022 01:55:50 -0000

Hi,

I did a Shepherd's/Chair's review of this draft and noticed a few things:


The draft needs an IANA Considerations Section as such a section is
mandatory. Sorry I missed this till now. Its contents can simply be

       This document requires no IANA actions.


The draft admirably explains why using an unprotected field, such as
the 802.11 Access Category (AC), to select different PC number spaces
is problematic. But I don't understand why, depending on
implementation, use of different priorities, such as AC, couldn't lead
to excessive discarded packets. Isn't there essentially a requirement
that packet counter numbering happen after any mechanism that can
re-order packets (except unicast/multicast after implementation of
Section 3.1 of the draft). In other words, if you had different
priority streams and the different queues were implemented in firmware
inside your 802.11 chipset, might this not result in many old low
priority packets getting discarded at the receiver when the chipset
got around to sending them after emptying a higher priority queue?
Perhaps I am confused but should there be some comment about this?


The draft probably should not reference "802.11e", which was the
802.11 Amendment that added Access Categories, since it was long ago
merged into the base 802.11 standard and no longer exists as such.
Also, should add an entry to the References, probably Informational,
for IEEE Std 802.11 and use appropriately in the body text. Here is an
example such entry
   [IEEE802.11]
              IEEE standard for Information Technology, "IEEE Standard
      for Information Technology - Telecommunications and
      information exchange between systems Local and
      metropolitan area networks - Specific requirements -
      Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and
      Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications.",
      <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9363693>.
The above may not be exactly right but the RFC Editor will update to
the most recent reference as part of the publication process.


Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com