Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-08

<> Tue, 18 December 2018 09:22 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9EAB127598; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 01:22:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UXlqpggkjg4l; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 01:22:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24264130E66; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 01:22:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown [xx.xx.xx.65]) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 43JsxS47cCz4xM3; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:22:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.27]) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 43JsxS2l85zDq8h; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:22:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::65de:2f08:41e6:ebbe]) by OPEXCLILM7C.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::8007:17b:c3b4:d68b%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:22:36 +0100
From: <>
To: Dan Romascanu <>, "" <>
CC: "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-08
Thread-Index: AQHUkV3qOFUtQarcBUOpfgEIbePvY6WEQ5zA
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 09:22:35 +0000
Message-ID: <9203_1545124956_5C18BC5C_9203_94_20_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF924B783A40@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-08
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 09:22:41 -0000


I will take care of your comments as part of the next revision.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Romascanu [] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 15:29
Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-08

Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
Review result: Ready with Nits

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


Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-08
Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
Review Date: 2018-12-11
IETF LC End Date: 2018-12-18
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat



This document analyzes the impact of using non-standardized IGP Link State
implementations resulting in non-consistent tuning of parameters in the network
and increased possibility of creating micro-loops. It can be viewed as a
problem statement for standardized solutions like RFC 8405.

The document is short and clear for implementers and operators familiar with
networks running this class of protocols. Diagrams and table help in reading
and understanding the material.

Major issues:


Minor issues:


Nits/editorial comments:

1. In the introduction:

> For non standardized timers, implementations are free to implement it
   in any way.

It is not obvious what 'it' means. I guess it's about different values of
timers resulting in the possibility of micro-loops creation, but it would be
better to clarify.

2. It would be useful to provide short explanations that make the figures more
clear. In fig. 1 - what do the nodes represent (routers implementing the
protocols), in fig. 2, and 3 - the abbreviations on the y axis


Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.