[Detnet] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-tsn-05

Tim Chown via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Sun, 14 February 2021 15:33 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: detnet@ietf.org
Delivered-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C80A93A0E04; Sun, 14 Feb 2021 07:33:43 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Tim Chown via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: <int-dir@ietf.org>
Cc: detnet@ietf.org, draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-tsn.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.25.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <161331682374.13755.15439036471779607099@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Tim Chown <tim.chown@jisc.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2021 07:33:43 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/xvdaRSs8Ioa3TqfBgvP6OlOtIs0>
Subject: [Detnet] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-tsn-05
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 14 Feb 2021 15:33:44 -0000

Reviewer: Tim Chown
Review result: Ready with Nits


Re: INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-tsn-06

This draft details how a DetNet MPLS data plane can run over a TSN sub-network.

I have reviewed this document and believe it is Ready for publication, with
Nits, as listed below.


Loss rates -> loss rate
Provides congestion -> provide congestion
For MPLS-based -> for an MPLS-based

Include MSRP and RSVP-TE?

And resources -> and resource

>From MPLS -> from the MPLS
Does not -> do not
In case of -> In the case of

As per the IP doc, not being familiar with DetNet in detail it might be useful
to expand on the rationale for mapping to multicast given the “directed” flow.

As per the IP doc, I note it says there are no requirements stated for
TSN-unaware MPLS DetNet nodes in the document, but is it worth adding something
about requirements to ensure the TSN Relay can be reached?

Implementations -> implementation

of the document -> of this document
challanges -> challenges
Are member -=> are members
Single hop -> a single hop
In some case -> in some cases

Regarding the more complicated triggering for TSN-unaware nodes, should further
text be added about this?