Re: [Gen-art] [lisp] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-lisp-rfc8113bis-01

Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> Wed, 19 December 2018 08:42 UTC

Return-Path: <ggx@gigix.net>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02F1412008A for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:42:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gigix-net.20150623.gappssmtp.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 GPUymqnlqBgA for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:42:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr1-x443.google.com (mail-wr1-x443.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::443]) (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 28F0B130DEB for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:42:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr1-x443.google.com with SMTP id q18so18571222wrx.9 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:42:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gigix-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=asS3FqYkYU4GJelbDZkStj6RE44HHrEmsnIJCyZCLpg=; b=VQgZoTE+gFZr8vcEmgiRrqqVYuSZp4OFcCFg5f0Ncv+HiaWqlGponvyAVbyqsAnVfG dtIkJq1uxGeaKxSUTxrYrloagB1wCLbcGW6EdZ9QyINGiBbRJbrvW+y7mR/8esHTnGV/ YjRzNmcUhS8JIQMGiyGIrReVgZFwA9tLNJiPeBveprYebCsaCpuYpuoKS/kyzaSN2XhW oOinyTrKQnAzKjOqZii8yiOYaIs9/+GHCUnNtEDX55x9ESdx3ECLBwDmWoxt2YqqqjCM LqdiPxTuUVFEdwc/rnf2e4ln/c9yWm2gHKrkXpE+UvYBTbRXO/J+NSr/hWxz5HJ3q6Zq aQSg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=asS3FqYkYU4GJelbDZkStj6RE44HHrEmsnIJCyZCLpg=; b=tpYNfS9nS5BDDEz1xEmOU9Je9R+DIBKcPIjqVt2NMoeQg1yVOteLIHfysR9ZsCYjCr tNxzT6e3TWWgGq1zbwr5wxfDbAi2kOb9L8ame0Lwa/Bc1hoqwqp4ae/yOCiXPTE47V41 hFl1ptj9osEVXDaoQ3bAIziPHIXVQN5WpPsge8e0B+JoJgOgxp0iUWwM7ve51i7bNVYP cQpPZz2baNHf3BvETpun5ma1Onz9GdeZq2E1WgNNTDVYOCisDOY9ZMagSNHzi6RUvnmx nlxhuU5O0D60h5NdGyHJfbkE7G+1DVyRgb+01CcdFE/LzF9seWjnpyF/1LAcAqS2EY8f VSPQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWaCY99X0h6BlKssis7xWOk+euf8tiSWXdRNicOap5f3Qew29DDe M11IkUb0srC8vqoGU/Cx9ow9cQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/X3dBr0L/POGfdjwSVlcOmaHpgos8VQ51ouqhGCU/Tz6UkJbSBzUbSe18IXNQ0MwC6+iatCAg==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:fb0d:: with SMTP id c13mr19227250wrr.285.1545208967869; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:42:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:660:330f:a4:844b:645b:a365:677c? ([2001:660:330f:a4:844b:645b:a365:677c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l78sm8577041wma.0.2018.12.19.00.42.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:42:46 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.1 \(3445.101.1\))
From: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
In-Reply-To: <D12A1D05-F75D-46FF-A5AA-991817AA42BC@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 09:42:44 +0100
Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, gen-art@ietf.org, lisp@ietf.org, draft-ietf-lisp-rfc8113bis.all@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2032D0A3-7BC0-4D22-B5A8-DCD021EB0E88@gigix.net>
References: <154518630870.5131.10104452678736081639@ietfa.amsl.com> <da4ecf32-a1dd-1854-642e-77df66e61fdb@joelhalpern.com> <e439c990-7484-870f-f2fc-ac2300ae26d7@gmail.com> <f7ab6c01-b8bc-02ee-c491-da365d2e79ea@joelhalpern.com> <407BD77D-F364-4989-A6D2-C75DF9914402@gmail.com> <9cc58af9-2bcf-89d7-a2ae-3fc80e723d78@joelhalpern.com> <D12A1D05-F75D-46FF-A5AA-991817AA42BC@gmail.com>
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.101.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/FW0tTyB9ytR3T4-yEiWpqVSRWk0>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [lisp] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-lisp-rfc8113bis-01
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 08:42:55 -0000

Hi,

may be we do not need a state anything with respect of 6833bis.

Looking at the IANA considerations section of both 8113bis and 6833bis, they just request IANA to rename/allocate something in an existing registry.

In particular, 8113bis does not extend/update nothing in 6833bis.

IMHO we just drop the “update 6833bis” and we are fine.

Ciao

L.



> On 19 Dec 2018, at 06:37, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>; wrote:
> 
> Mohmad to comment.
> 
> Dino
> 
>> On Dec 18, 2018, at 8:49 PM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>; wrote:
>> 
>> That is the other fix he offered.  Just remove the updates tag.
>> I will leav eit to you and the the authors to determine which is correct.
>> Yours,
>> Joel
>> 
>> On 12/18/18 11:43 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
>>> 8113bis should say that is it *extending* the type field so we can have more types. The word “update” I always had a problem with because it can be interpreted as “replacing". Replacing something to fix a problem.
>>> 8113 is simply asking for one of the type value codepoint, so there can be another format to have more types.
>>> Dino
>>>> On Dec 18, 2018, at 9:24 PM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>; wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Authors: that sounds like a reasonable addition to me?
>>>> 
>>>> Yours,
>>>> Joel
>>>> 
>>>> On 12/18/18 10:48 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>>> On 2018-12-19 15:46, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>>>>>> This is part of the package to move the coherent set of base LISP specs
>>>>>> to PS.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The reason we did this rather than folding it into 6830bis / 6833bis is
>>>>>> that we had originally simply cited 8113, and then realized that needed
>>>>>> to move to PS along with everything else.  It seemed (and is) simpler to
>>>>>> do it separately rather than to further modify 6830bis / 6933bis.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As for why it updates 6833bis, that is because one of the cahnges in
>>>>>> moving the set to PS was to improve the split as to which information
>>>>>> belonged in which document.
>>>>> OK, but I still don't find it logical The text doesn't explain which part of
>>>>> 6833bis is impacted, and normally these days we require such an explanation.
>>>>> And if there is an impact, you're missing the opportunity of fixing the error
>>>>> or gap in 6833bis, so the reader of 6833bis will be none the wiser unless
>>>>> you insert a reference to 8113bis.
>>>>> On the other hand, if there is no error or gap, you don't need "Updates:"
>>>>> at all. (Unfortunately, we don't have an "Extends:" header.)
>>>>>   Brian
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yours,
>>>>>> Joel
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 12/18/18 9:25 PM, Brian Carpenter wrote:
>>>>>>> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
>>>>>>> Review result: Ready with Issues
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-lisp-rfc8113bis-01
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>>>>>>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>>>>>>> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>>>>>>> like any other last call comments.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>>>>>>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>;.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Document: draft-ietf-lisp-rfc8113bis-01.txt
>>>>>>> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
>>>>>>> Review Date: 2018-12-19
>>>>>>> IETF LC End Date: 2018-12-27
>>>>>>> IESG Telechat date:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Summary: Ready with issues
>>>>>>> --------
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Comments:
>>>>>>> ---------
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I note that this is being raised from Experimental to the standards track.
>>>>>>> Presumably that depends on the base LISP spec becoming PS.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Minor issues:
>>>>>>> -------------
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> "This document updates I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis." The text doesn't
>>>>>>> explain which text is updated. This is in contrast to RFC8113, which
>>>>>>> explains clearly how it updates RFC6830 (*not* RFC6833). Why doesn't
>>>>>>> this draft claim to update rfc6830bis? I'm going to assume that
>>>>>>> is an error.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In fact, why wasn't the definition of the LISP Packet Types registry
>>>>>>> moved into the base spec (rfc6830bis)? That is where it belongs.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Since rfc6830bis (and rfc6833bis) are still under IESG review, anything
>>>>>>> in them that needs updating should be updated! The fact is that rfc8113bis
>>>>>>> extends rfc6830bis, which is not the same thing as "updates".
>>>>>>> If the WG thinks that implementers of 6830bis need to read 8113bis,
>>>>>>> there should be a normative reference in 6830bis to 8113bis.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> lisp mailing list
>>>> lisp@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
>