IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Bier] draft-ietf-bier-lsr-non-mpls-extensions-02 shepherd review

Huaimo Chen <hchen.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 07 February 2024 16:13 UTC

Return-Path: <hchen.ietf@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 C879FC14F6A2; Wed, 7 Feb 2024 08:13:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.004
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.004 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_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 adGUeqJcCnXD; Wed, 7 Feb 2024 08:13:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb31.google.com (mail-yb1-xb31.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b31]) (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 B9032C14F68D; Wed, 7 Feb 2024 08:13:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb31.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-dc6d94b9961so810244276.3; Wed, 07 Feb 2024 08:13:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1707322391; x=1707927191; darn=ietf.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fDd/6Xv9H+r/JdAH1gq/QbPJb65ogloOhUvt3e5dMD4=; b=bsAEDKwnOQQjB8/csVq3XylVqxmD5T5EDx137czDsD4llCfT+vGDT1yOrmsiblzFiS lbg++w5GA3k3Ph/iOmq9u/huWzc6+0TcAkIVxDXLy3YTs2lblNbkK8R11JUpkiXrrtnk 56Oo5MoEa7KBNI21xjs1xQKnZUQZ5hac7fkUmfBy7+bTxKXNZYFKRFuhSiVKy5lG0CC3 npC9qa4/nvD/0Vko8gnBFvfkoS2u9L+qAVgQOYteKm2+nZ2x9MVgTh2E+aqjVgqnT7ai V8Ef74B1iL3EEEAoaXLQ/11G+z+dNhhPmrnNqp4rtzarO0jKK52IOsqcVjN/arSEbJSj 113w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1707322391; x=1707927191; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fDd/6Xv9H+r/JdAH1gq/QbPJb65ogloOhUvt3e5dMD4=; b=L5g5PCr+CAlSIW//KxB4WM99lm3YpO6rJu67FZEKqQUrR9RXndWJgXw5AkyoK+Hjif huNgmjcKaVYUIJ+5Q1UedvDkhaWfo8ca4F52tlchfXIlBi9MjOchd6bn3nIJ5GJNc/zZ z8RT6If3LrQYuJGK3PTZz7dIb8brPWl56zIgCP1b0u2akDWs61Y5oNYt+X5r572k0kh5 0HiYl0QP2WU9Aryw5zjoVbZBkzqnuPBnL/qQl2GjktYLgAG9typJdVhjqsoLkUUF2HC7 UdvgSPxDfYK7WqAx04tc7baI8vzBqKUMtFrZBsXf2vf6jokesOPRpmqmWYf79M4igSkN zyNw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywmfhk2nkKy2tRE2+1lcsT6ScUhLpadbPTPsCVpUMT5g9miLQzv wyVfffuFhB3h9qXifZIKGnMW2qqseCvVmq02kVdGZ90TS613YMjR2AfEyeEwXoz8UTtKBaF8UeT YHIM2DoXARNMQB9gtzWwdZ2hJAV3oYAUWPHE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFOI0P7FEXup1TlDVBp0MOKwC7eqmVqp/tsQR41KSj8zplHynHaqBzrjGBtdo/gc1qWH5XuTMbHSei7gYGSjlg=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:8284:0:b0:dbf:ec4:311f with SMTP id r4-20020a258284000000b00dbf0ec4311fmr5379071ybk.58.1707322390765; Wed, 07 Feb 2024 08:13:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHJHfp=Je1EiNC95Up6=xv9eu9LuP3Yg8AZy2xuzSxZg5uFHNg@mail.gmail.com> <IA1PR05MB9550D835E1DDC2BABA801EA6D4452@IA1PR05MB9550.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <IA1PR05MB9550D835E1DDC2BABA801EA6D4452@IA1PR05MB9550.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
From: Huaimo Chen <hchen.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2024 11:12:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHJHfpkpnhrDsNe7o9kKhbvjyZzOSY2N4p8s7qZzqmjkNijONQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net>, draft-ietf-bier-lsr-non-mpls-extensions@ietf.org, bier@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009e65180610ccf8c2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/wJT_sIHF3GpxKbJsJ5x9goWIrDE>
Subject: Re: [Bier] draft-ietf-bier-lsr-non-mpls-extensions-02 shepherd review
X-BeenThere: bier@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"Bit Indexed Explicit Replication discussion list\"" <bier.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bier/>
List-Post: <mailto:bier@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2024 16:13:15 -0000

Hi Jeffrey,

    Thanks for your quick response.
    I have reviewed the -03 document and updated the write-up
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bier-lsr-non-mpls-extensions/shepherdwriteup/

    The document is ready.

Best Regards,
Huaimo

> *From:* BIER <bier-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of * Huaimo Chen
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 6, 2024 6:35 PM
> *To:* bier@ietf.org; draft-ietf-bier-lsr-non-mpls-extensions@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [Bier] draft-ietf-bier-lsr-non-mpls-extensions-02 shepherd
> review
>
>
>
> *[External Email. Be cautious of content]*
>
>
>
> Hi Authors,
>
>     I have reviewed the document and written the initial shepherd review.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bier-lsr-non-mpls-extensions/shepherdwriteup/
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bier-lsr-non-mpls-extensions/shepherdwriteup/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!DPcDeqS50UUKoOQ7zzl7crhCCPSNefpROOnQ5SUDzTwIfw0xoRp1dSdzQYgZh_x89j3BHF_d26lYCJnA6RAB$>
>
>     The document is straight forward. I have some comments below:
>      1) In Section 4.  Security Considerations, it is better to add some
>         texts about security concerns for the extensions to OSPFv3.
>      2) For IS-IS Sub-Sub-TLV, sub-sub-TLV and Sub-sub-TLV are used in the
> document.
>         It seems better to use one format consistently.
>         In IS-IS TLV codepoints, Sub-Sub-TLV is used.
>         For IS-IS Sub-TLV, it is similar.
>      3) For OSPF Sub-TLV, Sub-TLV and sub-TLV are used in the document.
>         It is better to use one format consistently.
>
> Best Regards,
> Huaimo
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email