Re: [Detnet] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-11: (with COMMENT)

[Balázs Varga A <[e-mail]>]

Hi Barry,

Many thanks for the review and the comments. 
Regarding:
- Section 2.1 and having data-plane-framework as informative and not as normative.
The reference in section 2.1 is only for the terminology used in the data-plane-framework.
That is the reason to have it as an informative reference.

- Section 4.2.1, clarifying "and (2) to allow non-skip zero S/N what simplifies implementation."
Text here intends to refer, that a circular unsigned sequence number space - including 0 as well - is 
easier to implement. The Generic PW MPLS Control Word (PWMCW) defined in [RFC4385]
uses a circular unsigned 16-bit number space that _excludes_ the value zero.

- Section 6, "for the mitigation of Man-In-The-Middle attacks"
Thanks for the suggested re-phrasing “for mitigating attackers-in-the-middle”. We intended to
use the most widely used terminology for such attacks.

I hope these clarifies your comments.

Thanks & Cheers
Bala'zs

-----Original Message-----
From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 6:24 AM
To: The IESG <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Ethan Grossman <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-11: (with COMMENT)

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-11: 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-detnet-mpls/



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

Just some small, non-blocking, and easy-to-address comments here:

Abstract:
   This document builds on the DetNet
   Architecture and Data Plane Framework.

Section 2.1:
   This document uses the terminology established in the DetNet
   architecture [RFC8655] and the DetNet Data Plane Framework
   [I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework].  The reader is assumed to be
   familiar with these documents, any terminology defined therein

Then how is it possible that data-plane-framework is informative?  I think it has to be normative.

— Section 4.2.1 —

   and (2) to allow non-skip zero S/N what simplifies implementation.

I can’t parse that.  Can you fix the wording or explain what I’m missing?

— Section 6 —

   for the mitigation of Man-In-The-Middle attacks

This is entirely up to your judgment, but please consider using phrasing such as “for mitigating attackers-in-the-middle” here.  Thanks.