[core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-ietf-core-sid-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 15 July 2021 09:29 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: core@ietf.org
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5C1F3A243C; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 02:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-core-sid@ietf.org, core-chairs@ietf.org, core@ietf.org, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, jaime@iki.fi, jaime@iki.fi
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.34.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Zaheduzzaman Sarker <Zaheduzzaman.Sarker@ericsson.com>
Message-ID: <162634134491.20957.9891384677904460366@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 02:29:04 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/6Kkm13n4rRpSsWYZg4AVWw8Vb7k>
Subject: [core] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's Discuss on draft-ietf-core-sid-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 09:29:05 -0000

Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-core-sid-16: Discuss

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 DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

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


This should be very easy to resolve and I want to make sure that we understand
the situation here better -

*Section 3 : says -

    "The creation of this new version of the ".sid" file
   SHOULD be performed using an automated tool"

  If this is supposed to be the automation process written in appendix B then
  putting a reference here makes sense. If not, then as this is very important
  tool, more information need to be added here in this specification (like,
  where to find it, who create and maintains it, any reference to such an
  existing tools). Also I am missing what consequences one need to consider if
  the process is not automated. If this is same as written in the introduction -

   "Assignment of SIDs to YANG items can be automated.  For more details
   how this can be achieved, please consult Appendix B."

  Then we have two kind of instructions for the same thing - "can be" and a
  normative "SHOULD". Hence it need to be clarified which one should prevail.


Thanks for the efforts in this document.

* I support Robert Wilton's Discuss and Benjamin Kaduk's discuss no.2

One more clarification comment -

* Section 7.5.2: says -

    "  The
   maximum SID range size is 1000.  A larger size may be requested by
   the authors if this recommendation is considered insufficient.  It is
   important to note that an additional SID range can be allocated to an
   existing YANG module if the initial range is exhausted."

  I have hard time understanding the mentioning of the maximum SID range here.
  does this mean this document sets the maximum range to 1000 but others can
  have more? please clarify.