IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] Some additional minor comments

"Jouni" <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Tue, 27 June 2017 05:26 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F5D41200E5 for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 22:26:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ipeWAh1oUVDw for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 22:26:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22a.google.com (mail-pf0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C3851287A7 for <Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 22:26:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id c73so10841928pfk.2 for <Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 22:26:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:thread-index:content-language; bh=3BvuI1n1qFgCQHNfOgIpu0wpm4+22uD04DqMMTxl/q8=; b=fJAXxzbXkePsAeut8mQdnzaZZ7qg/Z5hY8JT9kMVG53Y6DcOR1/FD/QbHxRyX2cNhl MtDp4/41eaEuTf8n35Acy3LCQfom2p0/mhmlvM5RKp+FnVzK91LhmDJn48Z8GalbdkUd bqeHbrXg+SGR8pLOYL6MXIDavkKj5UdngatNtw30LMQnQ+6Q4HU47Khn4LYn0BeXgJr/ IzFMOwxrS0dRDeFj4QPCHlM6BSFQ8697/o6TprGgyVZIx0m2Q8WXyLIyFy970vhBLdtp x3SgACtWl1w8SzZAbPUNizqlaUpy+aPX5dEMDEmbfLd3VsaM5ONUjNRSMEJ3D2JZ4aos 7Vww==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=3BvuI1n1qFgCQHNfOgIpu0wpm4+22uD04DqMMTxl/q8=; b=KuBAO0t1FjlaLBSFYFJP/OpkgsUIYwApnD84B8r59dI3b5ihyoJ6PWkLZ7XtuOycw0 Q6czsYB7NUZGoWC3CtM+72wLM9DV3yNZaCJ0/UIEc3AgHqzbuWd0k90FVqFe86lypm6M MIa5LJRFyV4c837mB9GBIe6v/OxmO4IF5yLvjZlBH3ucb/UMgCURNBwhix2ZE6JNyKE3 p+7s0UWSS+hmOrd+lHLsREDRiHhARUZ6UZ6lDguOBui+3STUPxOs96GRpzMIjWXzEHCo CvC7E4SwAGXTSEy+h+oc5wHpRGAEMXnK9ST36ogNg7SqjTK+bdPxdmNpXXBk+sYjvqil B7FQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOzmc/2mhD9X0Hbf40iJL9B2xoftQoA+T8h4hcl+YXp6gcWbfk0j lxHQEA3Ur+DenWGa
X-Received: by 10.99.154.18 with SMTP id o18mr3496831pge.251.1498541194747; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 22:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from JOKO ([2601:647:4200:e520:f954:f5be:cbcc:4249]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v8sm3047796pfa.10.2017.06.26.22.26.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Jun 2017 22:26:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
To: cjbc@it.uc3m.es, Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
References: <1498518253.2617.74.camel@it.uc3m.es>
In-Reply-To: <1498518253.2617.74.camel@it.uc3m.es>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 08:26:32 +0300
Message-ID: <05cd01d2ef05$f0a1dba0$d1e592e0$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQLlxaUs6bqCetV+8qgqDZs0CkDH1KASgBtg
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/mq192abw7QuzvCxkn8Gmx3_mtCA>
Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] Some additional minor comments
X-BeenThere: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DetNet WG Data Plane Design Team <detnet-dp-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet-dp-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:26:37 -0000

Feel free to edit into the master ;)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Detnet-dp-dt [mailto:detnet-dp-dt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 02:04 AM
> To: Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
> Subject: [Detnet-dp-dt] Some additional minor comments
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Some additional typos:
> 
> - "Addition service definitions" --> "Additional service definitions".
> - "The traffic control mechanisms used to deliver QoS for IP
> encapsulated DetNet flows is expected to be defined in a future document"
> --> "The traffic control mechanisms used to deliver QoS for IP
> encapsulated DetNet flows are expected to be defined in a future document"
> - "data plan" --> "data plane"
> - "MPLS defines a point-to-point co-routed bidirectional LSP is a point-
> to-point" --> "MPLS defines a point-to-point co- routed bidirectional LSP
> as a point-to-point"
> 
> And minor comments/questions:
> 
> - Figure 1 needs to be introduced.
> - In Section 7.4, why did we remove mentioning MPLS-TP as one example to
> create co-routed bidirectional LSPs?
> - Shouldn't we put back a figure in Appendix A? I can try to draft one.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Carlos
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list
> Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email