Re: [Detnet] AD review of draft-ietf-detnet-bounded-latency-07

Mohammadpour Ehsan <> Thu, 27 January 2022 10:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2C603A1CA7 for <>; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 02:05:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dB0D4Q_JLim9 for <>; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 02:05:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:620:618:1e0:1:80b2:e034:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8F153A1CD3 for <>; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 02:05:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=epfl; t=1643277927; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=I1ICWI3LxVLvpmyRzCT6qS/qn+CI6bddD4aKQs+GPL4=; b=rTOWXjHsFtbM0U+4Gl5nXbnc8wBwW26rlJSY6TCqW5tezwtZ8TYKkF3UV8qrE6t6u fsN1B+0/sYOP6raKLCinbjsfUpcbTewCkb2QG05dmCCSA/6hQJ5lUhCJpwEnutY4W 6xZLIBOFiVUFlm2thlVNuGHSJ1EzfwB3qfSsS0lDE=
Received: (qmail 8102 invoked by uid 107); 27 Jan 2022 10:05:26 -0000
Received: from (HELO ( (TLS, AES256-GCM-SHA384 cipher) by (AngelmatoPhylax SMTP proxy) with ESMTPS; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:05:26 +0100
X-EPFL-Auth: FOUM4DguHWmi5+4qMLCZY5bFU/WU3RnKwVNW6z60LH2gpw1cLDg=
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.20; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:05:26 +0100
Received: from ([fe80::ddaf:e0cc:a2d6:4aaf]) by ([fe80::ddaf:e0cc:a2d6:4aaf%10]) with mapi id 15.01.2308.020; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:05:26 +0100
From: Mohammadpour Ehsan <>
To: John Scudder <>
CC: "" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: AD review of draft-ietf-detnet-bounded-latency-07
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 10:05:26 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US, fr-CH
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F05FC43671E64F2C81F9268D90AE1289epflch_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] AD review of draft-ietf-detnet-bounded-latency-07
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 10:05:45 -0000

Great, thank you!


On 25 Jan 2022, at 23:13, John Scudder <<>> wrote:

Thanks, Ehsan. I’ve reviewed your diff and response comments, looks good. I’ve sent the request to start an IETF Last Call.



On Jan 24, 2022, at 6:20 AM, Mohammadpour Ehsan <<>> wrote:

Dear John,

Thanks again for your review of the Bounded Latency draft. We have gone through your comments and modified the draft accordingly. The new version is now online:<;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!XnFmp-_Qe_PlvBSvFeEQ5kqDC0sv-CftpQgkyP_TQUqfyW6Psdia6MltMcbEug$>. In the attachment, you can find the diff file of the last version and the new version as well as the response file to your comments (embedded as pdf comments).


Ehsan Mohammadpour
PhD candidate at Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL)
IC IINFCOM, LCA2, INF 011, Station 14, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland<;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!XnFmp-_Qe_PlvBSvFeEQ5kqDC0sv-CftpQgkyP_TQUqfyW6Psdia6Mke-zmcPQ$>

On 6 Jan 2022, at 23:23, John Scudder <<>> wrote:

Hi All,

I missed this one in my earlier comments:

Although the Acknowledgments section isn’t required, it’s customary, and I was a little surprised not to see one. It’s completely up to you whether to include one or not, but I thought I would check in to make sure this was a deliberate choice on your part. (I noticed this when I was checking up to see how the RTGDIR review by Tony P had been addressed.)



On Jan 3, 2022, at 5:33 PM, John Scudder <<>> wrote:

Dear Authors,

Here’s my review of your document. I don't think it will be too difficult to address my comments.

I’ve supplied my comments in the form of an edited copy of the draft. You can use your favorite diff tool to review them; I’ve attached a PDF of the rfcdiff output for your convenience if you’d like to use it. I’ve also pasted a traditional diff below in case you want to use it for in-line reply. I’d appreciate feedback regarding whether you found this a useful way to receive my comments as compared to a more traditional numbered list of comments with selective quotation from the draft.