IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Detnet] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-detnet-ip-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Fri, 26 June 2020 21:55 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 555ED3A0CE3 for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 14:55:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 7PfYTEm1EsV2 for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 14:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy7-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy7-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [70.40.196.235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A41333A0CDB for <detnet@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 14:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmgw12.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.9.0.12]) by gproxy7.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FAC8215E22 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 15:55:21 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id owJcjF3NjWYdhowJcj6lPn; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 15:55:21 -0600
X-Authority-Reason: nr=8
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=EJsoLWRC c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10:nop_ipv6 a=nTHF0DUjJn0A:10:nop_rcvd_month_year a=Vy_oeq2dmq0A:10:endurance_base64_authed_username_1 a=r77TgQKjGQsHNAKrUKIA:9 a=wU2YTnxGAAAA:8 a=eBPH5S8S8PXSTO9kMhYA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10:nop_charset_2 a=-RoEEKskQ1sA:10:nop_election2020_name_body a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=mIt5Vk7VGS7z5gnQkAgA:9 a=3GBBjtY19jcZFw7w:21 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10:nop_html a=Yz9wTY_ffGCQnEDHKrcv:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=mj4vWCEMU2TYE1et1uXJ+UhEgKoR2alV+fSD8Y7kAUI=; b=PhlswWHkWx1BhgdCQmG+uVeMcu 1wg+nGsXPBTdmTwII74/badN1CH/LWmvElUqBqkXKkn+jqeze36LLMXprU1HOpaAiTAaxIjeYzorB 3mBjaAiaTuqKkGb3N8KFjcb1L;
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (port=28125 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1jowJc-000Ko6-Oq; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 15:55:20 -0600
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-detnet-ip@ietf.org, Ethan Grossman <eagros@dolby.com>, detnet-chairs@ietf.org, detnet@ietf.org
References: <159292690639.3288.6217558507015891728@ietfa.amsl.com> <403116c7-6a80-9368-91ac-a0f0d1ba2cb0@labn.net> <CAMMESsyo=nmXmQiRvv1bssUq+mWvtSZ3tJQH+1fOy-0Tdsjj6Q@mail.gmail.com> <d49dac38-d679-d75f-63f6-15614e6cd382@labn.net> <cd8202db-bbf2-a889-8afe-b771fc2a7efb@labn.net> <CAMMESsxrDzEAbimuUZCsuPPDR=R_ARHR-eySK+jCBLVA3Hfa0g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <e21306cd-6787-79e8-816f-c847aec62ff5@labn.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 17:55:17 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMMESsxrDzEAbimuUZCsuPPDR=R_ARHR-eySK+jCBLVA3Hfa0g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------314D45AA74F99E046F493B81"
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-Source-L: Yes
X-Exim-ID: 1jowJc-000Ko6-Oq
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: ([IPv6:::1]) [127.0.0.1]:28125
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 6
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/xAeRib_k1g5CSZF2I6LUVr7qBBo>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-detnet-ip-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <detnet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 21:55:30 -0000

Alvaro,

On 6/26/2020 3:48 PM, Alvaro Retana wrote:
> Lou:
>
> There’s also a “SHALL” in §5.2.
>
I think this shall is right, how about, if we add:

        Specific management and control
           information will be defined in future documents, e.g., <xref
           target="I-D.ietf-detnet-yang"/>.


> The rest looks good to me.
>
> I trust you with the changes, so I’m clearing my DISCUSS.
>
Thanks;-)  I'll upload once we close on the above
> Thanks!
>
> Alvaro.
>
> On June 25, 2020 at 5:24:22 PM, Lou Berger (lberger@labn.net 
> <mailto:lberger@labn.net>) wrote:
>
>> Alvaro
>>
>> to be precise, you are looking for:
>>
>> section 4.3.1: s/MUST/must
>>
>> section 4.3.2: s/IP MUST/IP must
>>
>> section 5.3: s/MUST/must
>>
>> Right?
>>
>> I think that's fine as it translates to conformance being judged based
>> on (a) this document, (b) a yang or control plane document, and (c)
>> whichever traffic treatment RFCs/references the yang or control plane
>> document reference.  This is reasonable (at least to me).
>>
>> I think you have two additional points below...
>>
>> > On June 25, 2020 at 3:57:22 PM, Lou Berger (lberger@labn.net 
>> <mailto:lberger@labn.net>
>> > <mailto:lberger@labn.net <mailto:lberger@labn.net>>) wrote:
>> >
>> ...
>> >> >>> BTW, 0 is the IPv6 HbH option -- do you really want to exclude 
>> it?
>> >> >> I think so, but this was not extensively discussed. Do you 
>> think it's
>> >> >> the wrong call?
>> >> > I don't know.  But if all the other EHs are not excluded there 
>> must be
>> >> > a good reason.  I can imagine ways to use HbH to maybe carry other
>> >> > flow identification parameter...for later use.  Just thinking out
>> >> > loud...
>> >> >
>>
>> okay, I'll make the change to allow for zero values (assuming no
>> objections for others.)
>>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > ...
>> >> >>> (8) I believe that these references should be Normative:
>> >> >>> I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework and RFC8655.
>> >> >> the data plane framework is informative so generally references to
>> >> >> informative docs are informative.
>> >> > Nope.
>> >> >
>> >> > A normative reference is one that "must be read to understand or
>> >> > implement the technology"...regardless of the status

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email