IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Wed, 06 March 2019 18:59 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC9AA1275F3; Wed, 6 Mar 2019 10:59:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YXztL_KbAmaN; Wed, 6 Mar 2019 10:59:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com (mail-qt1-x834.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::834]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1824129A87; Wed, 6 Mar 2019 10:59:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id a48so14105197qtb.4; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 10:59:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xzhqpwP8UrCwgaXHGnPoaj9iwLmjITsqHW0d9YvaZJ4=; b=ul2hkk1uubG7RomjNsOuvure2Wqr38FBXaxdOLBck3ahF9x1rZKTsawK5zRzHwjwea NWdc1ODduMNm+b1OpAy3K4jUyap6Pfmx7gCDOemUchSjJS61TeiMqJAyDfPO9BSZ5QsA 06cgdEEua0Kp7Xeu5QBapGXJp+St8vKFfHwbMsLQ4g5Ig1KD8iHAaB7rpGaILTWeZl3B AfZASvgf3S06+gSLZL+q37+xDxkBkR95/Ej+hY4JeUI86WYrvNuG2avfLiVot5EboTJO /U56ytcK0MRYAB/RiwcnNsxI2hnhAOAFk59emoMyw4XXipWKWAgl/pmiqBmRSC3ZTer0 ccKA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xzhqpwP8UrCwgaXHGnPoaj9iwLmjITsqHW0d9YvaZJ4=; b=NG8DBpAa3cXRV/nx52QdHMEuWCSUyu8JraozJ1oCgqheDlbdZF4DgIEW8JC4PaFLCg aVizFoT6H0BYHP9Nxj0F0WFxd9UQKC7TOyi0IWTNp9MGGWq/tUOOGMDWxNOsUda/pmK8 dVQaf5FEiIxOI5XVCs8gM6/V+irLr3uU0SxRQeVVyXPX455+6dwKnfczv1q0H3/6f5Ir mIPxbATUybd1Yd1k8Ouw7mwM1gE/a5DwLONIqr0FkU/sBVqzs56Yr7/StXfh6KNlgmov HycKg3AZI4J8Q4yVvmfQ5/vbjsG0DbqL9LBRMYvXS63QGt7d9/hoPYRe6j1cJ0fpXOJS b52w==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVgE0FrQp4gSq7phfSDNdzUYrbStm+nYqVMijDnk0QSl2VLP/4W a5C1gptmqAu59/kg/aKttqpKBpsNW90NQjD+fa4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz/A4OeMG7olOPz1V9B5B+++C4LoezZF1rSZNnxwWgN8yd1EsTuB6zJsugI0ZLNX6a6n1zBih1mx1AB+7AvaHQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:ae1a:: with SMTP id y26mr7565378qvc.234.1551898746812; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 10:59:06 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <6687_1551262912_5C7664C0_6687_242_18_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF924C199D40@OPEXCAUBMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <090901d4d063$75aa6cf0$60ff46d0$@olddog.co.uk> <30790_1551796864_5C7E8A80_30790_14_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF924C19B882@OPEXCAUBMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <036f01d4d42e$0ec01340$2c4039c0$@olddog.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <036f01d4d42e$0ec01340$2c4039c0$@olddog.co.uk>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2019 13:58:56 -0500
Message-ID: <CAA=duU1ZKrhWA56VNek2V-od3VKbz44k3GUDpNKeSET-+zTaLA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: stephane.litkowski@orange.com, draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane@ietf.org, bess@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000087fd5805837195fd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/7wEyvQnLyUpM9fjX9Qq1aaZrz74>
Subject: Re: [bess] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane-06
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 06 Mar 2019 18:59:10 -0000

Adrian,

(resending to everyone, not just Adrian)

>>> References:
>>>
>>> I think that the mpls-sfc and mpls-sfc-encaps should also be
>>> normative as you are defining a controlplane to use them.
>>
>>I don't mind doing that.
>
> [SLI] These two are more debatable. Let's keep them as info, and
> we will see if IESG raises any concern.

Well, actually, since those two docs are on the Standards Track and are
well ahead in the pipe, let's make them Normative.


Actually, mpls-sfc-encaps is Informational, not standards track, so you may
wish to keep the reference informative else it'll be a downref. That's OK,
as long as that's included in the IESG writeup.

Cheers,
Andy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email