Re: [CCAMP] Document shepherd review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability

Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Tue, 10 May 2022 07:52 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B195C157B36; Tue, 10 May 2022 00:52:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MAY_BE_FORGED=1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 sRoPjlBgktRr; Tue, 10 May 2022 00:52:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta8.iomartmail.com (mta8.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.158]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A8A7C157B42; Tue, 10 May 2022 00:52:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (vs4.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.122]) by mta8.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 24A7qSda029129; Tue, 10 May 2022 08:52:28 +0100
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6FF24604A; Tue, 10 May 2022 08:52:28 +0100 (BST)
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA62C46043; Tue, 10 May 2022 08:52:28 +0100 (BST)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.249]) by vs4.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 10 May 2022 08:52:28 +0100 (BST)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V (229.197.bbplus.pte-ag1.dyn.plus.net [81.174.197.229] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 24A7qRsX010375 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 10 May 2022 08:52:28 +0100
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: wang.qilei@zte.com.cn, ccamp@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability.all@ietf.org
References: 000101d860c7$d3f02a00$7bd07e00$@olddog.co.uk, 202205060900212890011@zte.com.cn <202205101536285865867@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <202205101536285865867@zte.com.cn>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 08:52:28 +0100
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <034b01d86442$e5aba480$b102ed80$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: en-gb
Thread-Index: AQKtwkDqBclnHhhI2U3VWj/Xr2Zs96ttAPBg
X-Originating-IP: 81.174.197.229
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.0.1002-26884.006
X-TM-AS-Result: No--25.624-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--25.624-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.1002-26884.006
X-TMASE-Result: 10--25.624300-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: H7j25dB0salgrjeh0lt2oNKDcT1f9CjEQR7lWMXPA1vunPhGdvdhmecD DzKnTzUsr2AKsL23/l7Lh4FtUMTxGudv6cWcdrc0M28Gw1kk5csZskwWqoib3DBz1OEwfepXKuY UNhe5JQx2TKGjRaQBeLYGoqRq8rN4X6OrMQajfMQdZEkR8Y/meU0s9CXRACW0LDY/8SIHRTtY5e q1n2I7/1ArLnbrMSxCcR2OhTWHeJSjG/WUQM0mI5wUCB/0suUgCvDDKqAtPfY5kn3mhkReUbK4N RAK0CXHcKOSpdxu/Rvm7HHHEiyU5RNXpI2Q1yfbOM0alYIi99PJ5SXtoJPLyFgLks93sG9trVID zIJpk8CzwZ37HydKHkY/GPWv9jisdgynGfPk5sr4t8u4p+B04H17sRMyFowRzLaLRraReVZgnwZ i25n1GlrsKsrBqKxwoR95BOk4NXzbazPcdv/329+pUF0HsjxRsVwPMKjZm1aKHzvqRd4HksAtpB ZTCMmJ585VzGMOFzCBrDV+XoP2jlOm2gN+nomsxEHRux+uk8j5TYhzmfVNPgwWxr7XDKH8lExlQ IQeRG0=
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/0ev_v8Wx7SFKL-ZIBe_VxcwATCI>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Document shepherd review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 07:52:39 -0000

Thanks Qilei,

I'll complete the shepherd work so Daniele can pass it all to the AD.

I raised a defect (https://github.com/ietf-tools/datatracker/issues/3944) for the date problem.

Cheers,
Adrian

-----Original Message-----
From: wang.qilei@zte.com.cn <wang.qilei@zte.com.cn> 
Sent: 10 May 2022 08:36
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk; ccamp@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability.all@ietf.org
Subject: Re:Document shepherd review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability

Dear Adrian & CCAMPers,

Thanks for Adrian's Shepherd work. One 09 version was just uploaded to address the comments. 
Which could be found at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability/

One interesting thing is when I used the conversion service (https://author-tools.ietf.org/) to convert the xml file to txt file some minutes ago, the date I could see at the front part of the draft is 10 May 2022. 
But when I submit the xml file to post this draft, the date that is showed in the draft on IETF website is 8 May 2022. I personally can't figure out why...

But anyway, it doesn't matter to me.

Thanks
Qilei



------------------原始邮件------------------
发件人:王其磊 Wang Qilei
收件人:AdrianFarrel;draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability.all@ietf.org;
抄送人:'CCAMP';rvaliveti@infinera.com;zhenghaomian@huawei.com;huubatwork@gmail.com;sergio.belotti@nokia.com;
日 期 :2022年05月06日 09:00
主 题 :Re:Document shepherd review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability
Thank you Adrian for the Shepherd work. All the comments are accepted. We will post the 09 version as soon as possible, as the draft is going to be expired soon.
Detailed reply could be found in-line.

Thanks
Qilei


发件人:AdrianFarrel
收件人:draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability.all@ietf.org;
抄送人:'CCAMP';
日 期 :2022年05月06日 05:34
主 题 :RE: Document shepherd review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability
Oh, and you can remove Section 5.
Qilei: well, we will remove this.

A
-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Sent: 05 May 2022 22:23
To: 'draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability.all@ietf.org'
<draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability.all@ietf.org>
Cc: 'CCAMP' <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: Document shepherd review of
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability
Hi,
I have stepped in as document shepherd for this document. Here is my
Review based on -08.
While you work on these comments and post a new revision, I'll do the
shepherd write-up.
Thanks,
Adrian
===
Abstract
Please expand "LSP" in the Abstract.
Qilei: will expand "LSP".
---
1.
Please expand OTN, OTU, ODU, and LSP on first use.
s/Since the/Because/
Qilei: accepted.
---
2.
Not sure that using lettered bullets is necessary.
s/Detailed description/Detailed descriptions/
You should probably have a separate entry for TPN in this list.
It is probably not important, but I find the use of '5G' to be
unfortunately ambiguous given all the work of the 3GPP. Would it be
possible to use '5 Gbit/s' throughout the whole document?
Qilei: accepted.
for the lettered bullets, will replace them with " * ".
---
3.1
Is it clear what "FlexO" is? The term pops up as though the reader is
supposed to know it.
Qilei: will add some description about FlexO in the section 2.

---
In Figure 1 you have
+--------+           +--------+
|        +-----------+        |
| OTN    |-----------| OTN    |
| DXC    +-----------+ DXC    +
|        |           |        |
+--------+           +--------+
Is that '+' on the right-hand side intentional?
Qilei: well, will fix it.

---
3.4
'TS' is used in this section (and only in this section) without
expansion. What does it mean? I think you can...
OLD
As mentioned above, the OPUCn signal has 20*n 5G tributary slots.
NEW
As mentioned above, the OPUCn signal has 20*n 5G tributary slots
(TSs).
END
Qilei: accepted.
---
4.1
Section 3 of RFC7138 describes how to represent G.709 OTUk/ODUk with
TE-Links in GMPLS.  Similar to that, ODUCn links can also be
represented as TE-Links, which can be seen in the Figure 4.
I think that is "Figure 3"

Qilei: you are right. will fix it.---
4.2
'LO' and 'HO' are used without explanation
Qilei: will expand them.
---
4.2
An example is given in Figure 5 to illustrate the label format
Is that "Figure 4"?
Qilei: yes, you are right, will fix it.