[bess] Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib-01

Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> Tue, 22 December 2015 09:04 UTC

Return-Path: <mach.chen@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34DDC1A87BF; Tue, 22 Dec 2015 01:04:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CwBUF-zty3Du; Tue, 22 Dec 2015 01:04:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4578E1A87BC; Tue, 22 Dec 2015 01:04:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CFT74535; Tue, 22 Dec 2015 09:04:12 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SZXEMA413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.72) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Tue, 22 Dec 2015 09:04:11 +0000
Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.73]) by SZXEMA413-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.72]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:03:44 +0800
From: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
To: "draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib@tools.ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib-01
Thread-Index: AdE8l6g2f4Ni5AFqQjuOGGjy0vqRCw==
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 09:03:43 +0000
Message-ID: <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE28B686E7A@SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020203.5679120C.0139, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.3.73, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 75a0d10ed1d129c1268f58b3e24218a5
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/0Clpl5zF18s-emfK9dR53dfmOpY>
Cc: "bess-chairs@ietf.org" <bess-chairs@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: [bess] Shepherd review on draft-ietf-bess-l2l3-vpn-mcast-mib-01
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess/>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 09:04:16 -0000

Hi Authors,

I am requested (by the WG chairs) to shepherd this draft, here are my shepherd review comments on this document.


1. Idnits tool shows:
  ** There are 4 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one
     being 3 characters in excess of 72.

2. Expand the unwell-known abbreviations when first use.

2. Abstract says:
"This memo defines an experimental portion of the Management
   Information Base for use with network management protocols in the
   Internet community."

But the intended status of this document is "Standards Track", what's the real intention?

3. From the title, the document is to define mibs for L2 and L3 Multicast VPNs, it's better to define and scope what are L2 multicast VPN and L3 multicast VPN. And the draft uses "Multicast in VPN" to identify MVPN, it seems not accurate. It's better to use the consistent definition and description for MVPN through the whole document IMHO.

4. Section 4,
The LAST-UPDATED, ORGANIZATION, CONTACT-INFO and the Revision history should be updated to reflect the latest status.

5. Page 5,

This document defines the following flags:

       + Leaf Information Required (L)"

s/+ Leaf Information Required (L)"/ Leaf Information Required (L)"

6.
Section 5.  Security Considerations
   "N/A"

The same issue as the MVPN mib, please enhance it.

7. Please make sure that the MIB Modules are compiled cleanly.

Best regards,
Mach