[CCAMP] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-14: (with COMMENT)

Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 08 April 2019 08:51 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 953CB12006D; Mon, 8 Apr 2019 01:51:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke_via_Datatracker?= <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability@ietf.org, Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>, ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com, ccamp@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.94.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke?= <evyncke@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <155471350660.6393.17445335809418847224.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2019 01:51:46 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/P2yjJmL3rziQOgvMuQgJpTQfuEY>
Subject: [CCAMP] =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke=27s_No_Objection_on_draft-iet?= =?utf-8?q?f-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-14=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 08 Apr 2019 08:51:47 -0000

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-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 https://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:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMENTS
========

C1) Section 3.1 "Availability TLV" is a little too generic IMHO, should rather
be named "Bandwidth availability TLV"

C2) Section 3.1, the availability encoding by a float is possibly not the
optimum one esp with 3 bytes 'reserved'. I would have expected something
(perhaps too simple ?) such as one byte where 'n' means availability of 1-10**n
(for example, 3 means 1-10**-3 == 0.999). But, this is a detail.

NITS
====

N1) Section 3.1, s/MUST be less than 1and/MUST be less than 1 and/