Re: [CCAMP] Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-14: (with COMMENT)

Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com> Sun, 22 September 2013 09:11 UTC

Return-Path: <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
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 AD14021F9F01 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 02:11:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C3XODZ7J1L7N for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 02:11:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DB2B21F9EF2 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 02:11:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AVS73293; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:11:12 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.146.0; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 10:10:30 +0100
Received: from SZXEMA408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.40) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.146.0; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 10:11:07 +0100
Received: from SZXEMA504-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.86]) by SZXEMA408-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.40]) with mapi id 14.03.0146.000; Sun, 22 Sep 2013 17:11:00 +0800
From: Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, "'Lou Berger'" <lberger@labn.net>
Thread-Topic: Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-14: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHOsHWiSdiLfM+Xwk2+0DYt24G/7pnEanwggAUpKQCAB+/gYA==
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:10:59 +0000
Message-ID: <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF85CA749E4@SZXEMA504-MBS.china.huawei.com>
References: <20130912160455.20829.56903.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <010401ceafd5$9f53b0c0$ddfb1240$@olddog.co.uk> <95299064.1379071967367@mail.labn.net> <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF85CA6992C@SZXEMA504-MBS.china.huawei.com> <02a201ceb3bd$573a6a40$05af3ec0$@olddog.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <02a201ceb3bd$573a6a40$05af3ec0$@olddog.co.uk>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.66.72.159]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF85CA749E4SZXEMA504MBSchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework@tools.ietf.org>, "ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-14: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:11:26 -0000

Hi Adrian,



A new version (version 15) has been submitted to address the following comments.



For Tomonori's comments, I also sent a mail to describe how to address those comments (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg15220.html) a few weeks ago.



Please check the version 15 to see if all comments have been addressed correctly.







Best Regards



Fatai





-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 11:48 PM
To: Fatai Zhang; 'Lou Berger'
Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework@tools.ietf.org; 'Daniele Ceccarelli'; 'BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)'; ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org
Subject: RE: Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-14: (with COMMENT)



Hello,



It looks like I have only been getting some of the emails on this thread.

(Lou, is my ISP doing reverse DNS lookup on your emails again?)



I *am* hoping to see a revision of this document to pick up:



- Changes for Tomonori's Routing Directorate review as recorded in my Comment

- The text change I proposed to address Russ' Gen Art review as in Jari's

Comment

- Spencer's change of "underlined" to "underlying"

- A possible piece of text from Lou although it may be he has the docs mixed up



Thanks,

Adrian





> -----Original Message-----

> From: Fatai Zhang [mailto:zhangfatai@huawei.com]

> Sent: 14 September 2013 02:02

> To: Lou Berger

> Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-

> framework@tools.ietf.org; Daniele Ceccarelli; BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO); ccamp-

> chairs@tools.ietf.org; 'Jari Arkko'; housley@vigilsec.com

> Subject: RE: Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-

> framework-14: (with COMMENT)

>

> Hi Lou,

>

> Thanks. I am waiting for your comments.

>

> Note that this draft is [G709-FWK] instead of [G709-RSVP], so there is no OAM

> new section, :-)

>

>

>

>

>

> Best Regards

>

> Fatai

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net]

> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 7:37 PM

> To: Fatai Zhang

> Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-

> framework@tools.ietf.org; Daniele Ceccarelli; BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO); ccamp-

> chairs@tools.ietf.org; 'Jari Arkko'; housley@vigilsec.com

> Subject: Re: Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-

> framework-14: (with COMMENT)

>

> Fatai,

>

> It looks to me that another rev is needed to cover this comment and some rough

> text in the new OAM section. I'll send my comments on the latter within the

next

> few days. In the interim, others/coauthors should feel free to send their

> suggested improvements if they have any.

>

> Lou

>

> On 2:12am, September 13, 2013, Fatai Zhang wrote:

> > Hi Adrian,

> >

> > I find it seems that it is not required to update the document for the

authors

> when I tried to update the document by examining your mail again, :-)

> >

> > I would like to repeat: It is OK with that text.

> >

> > Please confirm if the authors need to provide a new version to address the

> comments.

> >

> >

> >

> > Best Regards

> >

> > Fatai

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Fatai Zhang

> > Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 9:56 AM

> > To: 'adrian@olddog.co.uk'o.uk'; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-

> framework@tools.ietf.org; Daniele Ceccarelli; 'BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)'

> > Cc: ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org; 'Jari Arkko'; housley@vigilsec.com

> > Subject: RE: Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-

> framework-14: (with COMMENT)

> >

> > Hi Adrian,

> >

> > I am fine with your proposed text.

> >

> > Will update the document soon.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Best Regards

> >

> > Fatai

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk]

> > Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 12:32 AM

> > To: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework@tools.ietf.org

> > Cc: ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org; 'Jari Arkko'; housley@vigilsec.com

> > Subject: RE: Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-

> framework-14: (with COMMENT)

> >

> > Authors,

> >

> > In discussion with Jari and Russ on today's IESG conference call, we agreed

that

> including some text like that below would be helpful...

> >

> > In general, throughout this document, 'ODUj' is used to refer to ODU

entities

> acting as LO ODU, and 'ODUk' is used to refer to ODU entities being used as HO

> ODU.

> >

> >

> > ...Would you be OK with that text (i.e., is it correct!)

> >

> > Thanks,

> > Adrian

> >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> > > From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of

> Jari

> > > Arkko

> > > Sent: 12 September 2013 17:05

> > > To: The IESG

> > > Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework@tools.ietf.org; ccamp-

> > > chairs@tools.ietf.org

> > > Subject: Jari Arkko's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-

> framework-

> > > 14: (with COMMENT)

> > >

> > > Jari Arkko has entered the following ballot position for

> > > draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-14: No Objection

> > >

> > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all

> > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this

> > > introductory paragraph, however.)

> > >

> > >

> > > Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html

> > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

> > >

> > >

> > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:

> > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework/

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > COMMENT:

> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> > >

> > > Thank you for writing this document, and it is generally ready to move

> > > forward. However, I was concerned with one minor detail which seems that

> > > there is some unclarity with a term.

> > >

> > > First, the document says:

> > >

> > > LO ODU: Lower Order ODU. The LO ODUj (j can be 0, 1, 2, 2e, 3, 4,

> > > flex.) represents the container transporting a client of the OTN that

> > > is either directly mapped into an OTUk (k = j) or multiplexed into a

> > > server HO ODUk (k > j) container.

> > >

> > > HO ODU: Higher Order ODU. The HO ODUk (k can be 1, 2, 2e, 3, 4.)

> > > represents the entity transporting a multiplex of LO ODUj tributary

> > > signals in its OPUk area.

> > >

> > > and then later, it says:

> > >

> > > With the evolution and

> > > deployment of OTN technology many new features have been specified in

> > > ITU-T recommendations, including for example, new ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4

> > > and ODUflex containers as described in [G709-2012].

> > >

> > > But it is unclear if this is referring to LO or HO ODUs or both, or

> > > something else. Could this be clarified, or did I missunderstand

> > > something?

> >

> >

> >