Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-08

Thomas Morin <thomas.morin@orange.com> Fri, 08 December 2017 09:39 UTC

Return-Path: <thomas.morin@orange.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 8303C126579; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 01:39:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.215
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.215 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT=1.449, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 VVI45QjUlUlk; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 01:39:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p-mail2.rd.orange.com (p-mail2.rd.orange.com [161.106.1.3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FDB41200CF; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 01:39:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p-mail2.rd.orange.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 81DC3E300BA; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 10:39:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: from FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.194.32.11]) by p-mail2.rd.orange.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1AA1E300B8; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 10:39:21 +0100 (CET)
Received: from l-fipglop (10.193.71.131) by FTRDCH01.rd.francetelecom.fr (10.194.32.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.361.1; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 10:39:21 +0100
Message-ID: <1512725961.28574.2.camel@orange.com>
From: Thomas Morin <thomas.morin@orange.com>
To: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" <sajassi@cisco.com>, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, "bess-chairs@ietf.org" <bess-chairs@ietf.org>
CC: "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 10:39:21 +0100
In-Reply-To: <A8721DD2-C743-4E4F-843B-86F1671A9170@cisco.com>
References: <CAMMESsw2x53Av-_zi5nL5czKCXYmi_mk0i6qyYYZDYHE8oo_tA@mail.gmail.com> <B7A13142-235A-455E-AD31-EAE02E0E916C@cisco.com> <CAMMESsz83SVrB3Xn7+jq=-Q4VWfcS1KPVutFkLXqAyD15-r17w@mail.gmail.com> <A8721DD2-C743-4E4F-843B-86F1671A9170@cisco.com>
Organization: Orange S.A.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.2-1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/D2QjWRhd4ybtmDuZL_RWcLGphxM>
Subject: Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-08
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 08 Dec 2017 09:39:25 -0000

Ali Sajassi (sajassi), 2017-12-08 03:01:
> M8.2. These should also be Normative: RFC7348, NVGRE, VXLAN-
> > GPE, RFC4023
> >  
> > [Ali] Please refer to Thomas explanation on this which is copied
> > here for your convenience:
> > “My process fu is weakening, but if this specification is standard
> > track
> > (and I believe it should be), I believe it can't normatively depend
> > on
> > Informative specs and some of the above are in this category.”
> 
> My reply:
> It can if we call the Down References out in the IETF Last Call and
> no one opposes.  I think we already processed at least one document
> with a DownRef toVXLAN, so I don’t think that’s a problem.
> In any case, the type of Reference should be decided based on the
> real dependency of the document, not on its status.
> [Ali2] Done. 

I've just updated the shepherd review to list the downward references.

Best,

-Thomas