[Bier] Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-12

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Tue, 08 October 2024 15:50 UTC

Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: bier@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bier@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 864FBC1CAE8E; Tue, 8 Oct 2024 08:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.853
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.853 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 AUEIRXYt4HjC; Tue, 8 Oct 2024 08:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk1-xa2e.google.com (mail-vk1-xa2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AA0DC14CF1C; Tue, 8 Oct 2024 08:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk1-xa2e.google.com with SMTP id 71dfb90a1353d-507904d0800so2140198e0c.2; Tue, 08 Oct 2024 08:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1728402597; x=1729007397; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=b+Cq5eTFVpcymhkK5282aQxvDvbvSMXaMvs1cWOJmt4=; b=c4YGOAC4DB98M0g5MNVI+fl73gnTmNn+ziSpdu8n3nwcS98CjuSh5ZMDKsQQIJ+qKc NiJuqNWMPYzfwcI41EG6VYz5vv7vNgnVObfxT/f0IfczTtwwQryG95vd5c6WMIp5wKOs CRSYlpSH/UETZEhqd0ifdsiQ+2jbK0fYlzglJ9k+gC2VBVcgovapgMm55VqZ2+IDGkuQ LCMV+BNw5Wd1v7xxoaURaMttL63xmc3jAGQerxAGYGRrlwwO1S/w/as4fYDv4iX4Lo8C nLk/+iq2Z5v5QBwHCl+KC62y+BbrWELyTYAYp74u9TgQZ5bRtze9pjKN+YGjvlW3aVeO whFw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728402597; x=1729007397; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=b+Cq5eTFVpcymhkK5282aQxvDvbvSMXaMvs1cWOJmt4=; b=NpH3eommojj7VW4+cxLj6wvBtU2Dy6fZSmLShVD3Osu+dkX+9hRmtkme/qavpsLqJB LkAoSGWX65QxcS88i7Tko23j9XUXwgnx82NNVmYWB6ZYABRdzr9dMwoMG6IuPhYZEy7S +b4rhoMGKY2h5KSQjoDiN/GA80R0lUBXj3bPugvasQocACoX4wZwd5te910kRZci6B3H HDAJ0RsTlJ/yXboeZRCCaIqOvk/Y/qJsiNFQZ+Mj708WuzO7W/Jw4S6SUGG/mrJevq35 hxn9jxGk/4vkQ7Ll2AAQtKz4qeDHYv9H7WvcIj9Oz1DbOD/XB4Qwxuk5YE//yrYtAhO5 X4yg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU7ZI9ZbzWi5x4m+mWjrLijIH+f2Z6kz3tV6a/uD2gPPHTCfEU41KF7ZZfpO0/ERrYMJ3PZSfQQqw==@ietf.org, AJvYcCUW43LiYppO+10NbbMn0oZv6q1BXEkodiPRYAekor2CJO2QG4j/gJ5zH5GqyvvVLiJC0RWtuxQ2JDMK@ietf.org, AJvYcCWgZnUjGGRHiRaC8tN6S/DaGpfe6f9OkTmXs6ohOChIrPx+QwlxIUOLFVEkMlk+CMmR0B6b@ietf.org, AJvYcCXrgajEdpjoMN0rhKTekHbsm1NiGaQb6byp7xPxyG62dOEf9FSoJxjYz6wSIqDWHXx/LafaFGCPKnEupiYDHKd+Z6yjnHts4pR0c8vr1fqqaFZbdQ==@ietf.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwxYgFsqJwcA8NTweF8cKn3aU7t7H2y7hD5kT8I0D2NKB2Yi2F5 oOaEuctJ1BetjD+DZPYDa6XpKWggppWMEYeEXa1nL66nz4jt6ppOocepmyC11BgJh+jBJTboQya HY73ighPFcOB1xza0Q2t22FBT51s=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHyMgdTvmtswbYmDzXSm021Qcwt4cpwcMFmE5x1LmBF+/cB09tkDY8a+8/hpxZfUw49i/LRk4YZF0Qtmpt5IjA=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:1783:b0:502:bd0d:abe2 with SMTP id 71dfb90a1353d-50c854949bemr12217056e0c.6.1728402597433; Tue, 08 Oct 2024 08:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <172788900227.1004732.7940049577699154983@dt-datatracker-7bbd96684-zjf54> <IA1PR05MB95500D8F9BEE07153713E56BD4722@IA1PR05MB9550.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <IA1PR05MB95500D8F9BEE07153713E56BD4722@IA1PR05MB9550.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2024 10:49:46 -0500
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcdT8qBK6NMv3WGXLVraiVWb7cQ3vi+ag-DVExoFmR7+rQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d959350623f9165d"
Message-ID-Hash: UHFGGVZBUUGTMW64FNLW6I2OA2NT7CKJ
X-Message-ID-Hash: UHFGGVZBUUGTMW64FNLW6I2OA2NT7CKJ
X-MailFrom: sarikaya2012@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-bier.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "bier@ietf.org" <bier@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions.all@ietf.org>, "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
Subject: [Bier] Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-12
List-Id: "\"Bit Indexed Explicit Replication discussion list\"" <bier.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/29rhx-9Jvb0QbBToodhL2414VJw>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bier>
List-Help: <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:bier-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:bier@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:bier-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:bier-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Jeffrey,

Please see inline.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 3:39 PM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang@juniper.net>
wrote:

> Hi Behcet,
>
> Thanks for your review and comments. I have posted the -13 revision to
> address them.
>
> Please see zzh> below for some clarifications.
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Behcet Sarikaya via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2024 1:10 PM
> To: gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: bier@ietf.org; draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions.all@ietf.org;
> last-call@ietf.org; sarikaya@ieee.org
> Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-12
>
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>
>
> Reviewer: Behcet Sarikaya
> Review result: Not Ready
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review
> Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for
> the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just like any other last call
> comments.
>
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>
> <
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!CgASV5ezXUNVWAIcPScISj_9M9mrzOL4DJQj9p4W9uWSCIaag2HDY49NYNgzROHCwWyPOw1L53mngJ0$
> >.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-bier-idr-extensions-??
> Reviewer: Behcet Sarikaya
> Review Date: 2024-10-02
> IETF LC End Date: 2024-10-03
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>
> Summary:The document presents BGP extensions for advertising the BIER
> information and methods for calculating BIER states based on the
> advertisement.
> Basically it interfaces BIER with BGP for realizing the multicast delivery.
>
> Major issues:As security reviewer pointed out, Sec. 1 claims the BIER
> attributes leaking out of BIER domain avoidance is not realized. It has
> excessive number of editorial issues. It has 6 authors.
>
> Zzh> As the security reviewer pointed out, the operation consideration
> section does talk about leak prevention. As I responded there, I added a
> reference to Sec. 1.
> Zzh> The six-author justification is provided in the shepherd write-up:
> "There are six authors and all have contributed to the document.The sixth
> co-author Zhaohui Zhang  is the main editor of version 8 and version 9. He
> make a huge effort to improve the draft.".
>

I raised this issue to the attention of the AD. I think he should take care
of it.


> Zzh> Sorry for the editorial issues especially the silly typos. Sometimes
> I forget to run revisions through the spell/grammar checker. I hope I have
> now addressed all of them.
>
> Minor issues:
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
> to coney -> to convey
>
> zzh> Fixed.
>
> the original draft name has idr extensions not BGP extensions. Of course
> draft name is very difficult to change after so many revisions.
>
> Zzh> Right. The draft name does not really matter 😊
>
> Section 2 on terminology does not contain all the acronyms used.
> All acronyms should be expanded in first use.
>
> Zzh> I added/expanded AFI/SAFI/NLRI/BIFT/LSP/AS. Please let me know if I
> missed anything else.
>
> Some TLV figures have a figure number some don't, why?
>
> Zzh> No good reason 😊 Apparently some use "figure" and some use
> "artwork". I have fixed them.
>
> Sec. 5 second par. sub-TLV at all, The entry's BFR Neighbor -> sub-TLV at
> all, the entry's BFR Neighbor
>
> Zzh> Fixed.
>
> Sec.5 states that BIER traffic is sent to the BFR-NBR either natively
> (BIER header
>    directly follows a layer 2 header) if the BFR-NBR is directly
>    connected,
>
> I think this is very important to emphasize that BIER supports/ realizes
> native multicast deliver as opposed to tunneling so the document should
> single out the cases of tunneling everywhere in the document.
>
> Zzh> The tunneling is only mentioned in these three paragraphs for the
> applicable scenarios, and I believe it is appropriate:
>
>    BIER traffic is sent to the BFR-NBR either natively (BIER header
>    directly follows a layer 2 header) if the BFR-NBR is directly
>    connected, or via a tunnel otherwise.  Notice that, if a non-BFR BGP
>    speaker re-advertises a BIER prefix (in this case it can not update
>    the BIER attribute since it is not capable), or if a BFR BGP speaker
>    re-advertises a BIER prefix without updating the BIER Nexthop sub-
>    TLV, the BFR receiving the prefix will tunnel BIER traffic - the BGP
>    speaker re-advertising the BIER prefix will not see the BIER traffic
>    for the BIER prefix.
>
>    How the tunnel is set up and chosen is outside the scope of this
>    document.  It can be any kind of tunnel, e.g., MPLS LSP or IP/GRE, as
>    long as the tunnel header can indicate that the payload is BIER.
>
>    ...
>
>    When BFR1 receives the routes, it calculates the BIFT entries, using
>    BFR2's address encoded in the BIER Nexthop sub-TLV as the nexthop.
>    Because BFR2 is not directly connected, a tunnel must be used.
>
> Sec.6 BFRer1 -> BFER1
>
> Zzh> Fixed.
>
>
I checked Rev. 13 vis-a-vis the points I had raised. I am happy to state
that all have been resolved to my satisfaction.
So I change my  review result to READY

Regards,
Behcet

> Zzh> Thanks!
> Zzh> Jeffrey
>