Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129-00

Meral Shirazipour <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com> Tue, 27 December 2016 18:30 UTC

From: Meral Shirazipour <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com>
To: Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129-00
Thread-Index: AdJXNB1E0N/ESknWQRubmpSBiDXXZQBVEviAAfm3OdA=
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2016 18:30:12 +0000
Message-ID: <ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A4E841A38@eusaamb107.ericsson.se>
References: <ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A4E828D6C@eusaamb107.ericsson.se> <20161217121005.GL34914@Vurt.local>
In-Reply-To: <20161217121005.GL34914@Vurt.local>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/MKvnE1wz5j4q5wF_K08-vVVb8pg>
Cc: "draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129.all@tools.ietf.org>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129-00
Precedence: list

Hi,
  Many thanks for the changes.

Best Regards,
Meral

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Job Snijders [mailto:job@ntt.net]
> Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2016 4:10 AM
> To: Meral Shirazipour <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com>
> Cc: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129.all@tools.ietf.org; gen-art@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129-00
> 
> Dear Meral,
> 
> A new version of the draft has been published to address your comments.
> Please review the diff here:
> 
>     https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-30-31-129-01
> 
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 12:35:40AM +0000, Meral Shirazipour wrote:
> > Summary:
> > This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have some
> comments.
> >
> > Major issues:
> >
> > Minor issues:
> > -[Page 2]:
> > "This has led to  deployment problems for new technologies such as
> > Large BGP Communities [I-D.ietf-idr-large-community]."
> >
> > Not sure if draft-ietf-idr-large-community explains the issues caused
> > by the use of these attribute values ? If yes it would be good to
> > point to that section.  If not it would be good to add short summary
> > here.
> 
> A short summary has been added.
> 
> > Nits/editorial comments:
> > -[Page 2], Section 4 please refer to latest version of
> > [I-D.ietf-idr-large-community].
> 
> I mistakenly linked to -08 (while -11 is the latest version), this will be corrected
> before publication.
> 
> > -[Page 2]:
> > "The squatting of values 30, 31, 129, 241, 242 and 243 has been
> > confirmed by the involved vendors or through source code review."
> >
> > A bit confusing, somehow it seems 30 is already deprecated as per:
> > https://www.ietf.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xml
> > with reference to [draft-ietf-idr-large-community].
> > The switch between used of 30 to  use of 32 happened between v04 and
> > v05 of [draft-ietf-idr-large-community]?
> > Perhaps
> > https://www.ietf.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xml
> > should be updated to point to this draft instead?
> 
> Yes, I expect IANA to remove the reference to Large Communities behind
> 30 (because Large no longer has anything to do with value 30, and indeed we
> want to prevent confusion), and reference this document, if approved for
> publication.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Job

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-… Meral Shirazipour
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Job Snijders
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Meral Shirazipour