[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-ippm-type-p-monitor-02.txt

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Wed, 21 October 2015 03:13 UTC

Return-Path: <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E92B1AD481; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 20:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8jKWSf0OGwOm; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 20:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usevmg20.ericsson.net (usevmg20.ericsson.net []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C02161AD248; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 20:13:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c618062d-f79ef6d000007f54-f3-5626a2456b57
Received: from EUSAAHC008.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain []) by usevmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 4E.37.32596.542A6265; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 22:21:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUSAAMB107.ericsson.se ([]) by EUSAAHC008.ericsson.se ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 23:13:28 -0400
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
To: "draft-ietf-ippm-type-p-monitor.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ippm-type-p-monitor.all@ietf.org>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-ippm-type-p-monitor-02.txt
Thread-Index: AdELrnQtmghXe3H1SiKtOvVwCaDy+w==
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 03:13:27 +0000
Message-ID: <E87B771635882B4BA20096B589152EF63A9CA979@eusaamb107.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrKLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPgq7bIrUwg4V/WCyOH82yuPrqM4sD k8eSJT+ZAhijuGxSUnMyy1KL9O0SuDLOrvjOVLCVt+JkRwNTA+N3ri5GDg4JAROJA2dKuxg5 gUwxiQv31rOB2EICRxklFl+o7WLkArKXM0o875gBlmADqt+w8zMTiC0iMIFR4udOQxBbWMBT YuvlWVDxAIkP8xezQth6EqdWTGUGsVkEVCU6nm8Es3kFfCVW7/3MCGIzAi3+fmoNWC+zgLjE rSfzmSAOEpBYsuc8M4QtKvHy8T9WCFtJYs7ra8wQ9ToSC3Z/YoOwtSWWLXwNNV9Q4uTMJywT GIVnIRk7C0nLLCQts5C0LGBkWcXIUVqcWpabbmSwiREYzsck2HR3MO55aXmIUYCDUYmH94GH WpgQa2JZcWXuIUZpDhYlcd79S+6HCgmkJ5akZqemFqQWxReV5qQWH2Jk4uCUamDUtS/+/8Rd bcIya22pAt2TprbatZVvdK9uNJNaWhzidTHg/ooj+WeXHCzcLLNz28UNtQd13dxZBK5771rT 8iP2X6mX2VzTALYdHxKqVrzt29wc8m2PR9xnl+Umb/5sPJMk6lcsp5TP3ZLK8q1mqWlHl+LR 1Q3PVCPfvf3wQjDWXNRN90pc8nolluKMREMt5qLiRABdCtzMSAIAAA==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/ObM2QZ_EnR2dpf2dNw1OCxOP5D8>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-ippm-type-p-monitor-02.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 21 Oct 2015 03:13:33 -0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before
posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-ippm-type-p-monitor-02.txt
Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan
Review Date: 2015/10/20
IESG Telechat date: 2015/10/22

Summary: The draft is almost ready for publication as a Proposed Standard but 
I do have some comments that you may wish to address.


* MBZ is not expanded. I understand this should expand to "Must Be Zero" and 
it MUST be set to zero by senders and MUST be ignored by receivers. It makes 
sense to add this to the terminology section or before first use.

* Please cite as references RFC2474 for the DSCP field and RFC3168 for ECN.

* Section 2.2.1:

"the first six bits of the Differentiated Service field"

Not sure if this "first" qualification is required as RFC2474 defines the 
DSCP field to be *exactly* 6 bits long. I have a similar issue with the word 
"following" in the definition of the ECN field as they are two separate fields.

* Section 2.2.2: Figure 4 seems to be incomplete and it has no mention of 
either DSCP or ECN. Is this correct? Probably would also explain where the 28 
byte padding requirement comes from.


* Section 2.2.1

s/MUST extracts/MUST extract/