Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-15

"Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com> Thu, 13 December 2018 08:26 UTC

Return-Path: <ginsberg@cisco.com>
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 6663B128766; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 00:26:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.96
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.96 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-1.459, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 pQp4B-xHWbD7; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 00:26:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 024DB126CB6; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 00:26:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3602; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1544689572; x=1545899172; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=KP0mz16SWWdAh5YVlXbiQj+beJYhZZXlg+CR3G55uS0=; b=QlOhtVbVN8/nI2yhnIO9z3fz4dL2GVlni7b37n+uFUwY7SsU5lWCLCy7 4BgshAd/h6Ywbl2H4620LtC/018rMscu2jlQof6pJ+bbwqmDYDp+cQUoo rDJ1JqsB8WfgPkfCcbjKmtYEz6GvboilMq0J9tGly04NWCQ8lHTi1DJ77 E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ADAABSFhJc/49dJa1jGQEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQcBAQEBAQGBUQQBAQEBAQsBggNmgQInCoNyiBmOH4NFlA+BJAVRCwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BI4RJAheCaiI0CQ0BAwEBAgEBAm0cDIU8AQEBAQIBIxFFBQcEAgEIDgMDAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAwImAgICMBUICAIEAQ0FCIMagXgID6ZqgS+KMAWBC4sxF4FAP4ERgxKDHgK?= =?us-ascii?q?BeIJtglcCiWuXJAkChwuKRCCBXIUcgyqHKIkuhHaKfgIRFIEnHzg1gSFwFYM?= =?us-ascii?q?nixyFP0ExjDmBHwEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,347,1539648000"; d="scan'208";a="212491641"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Dec 2018 08:26:10 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (xch-aln-005.cisco.com [173.36.7.15]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id wBD8QAbl018328 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 13 Dec 2018 08:26:10 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) by XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (173.36.7.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 02:26:10 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Thu, 13 Dec 2018 02:26:09 -0600
From: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
To: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
CC: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp.all@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-15
Thread-Index: AQHUkrW5Cqp/v07/Z02AfCHMmBMQX6V8UzIg
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 08:26:09 +0000
Message-ID: <c55fbf14f6ec43f5a788cb2c90c4684a@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com>
References: <154468622674.21337.6779624997213312596@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <154468622674.21337.6779624997213312596@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.104.232]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.15, xch-aln-005.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-7.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/VDKNXvd0NGe0NVi2cCgOqT-swRE>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-15
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: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 08:26:14 -0000

Erik -

Thanx for the review.
Responses inline.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>;
> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 11:30 PM
> To: gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: idr@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp.all@ietf.org
> Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-15
> 
> Reviewer: Erik Kline
> 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
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>;.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-??
> Reviewer: Erik Kline
> Review Date: 2018-12-12
> IETF LC End Date: 2018-12-12
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> 
> Summary: Seems like a fairly straightforward detailing of TLVs the meanings
> of
> which are defined elsewhere.
> 
> Major issues:  [obvious] A primary normative reference is itself still a draft.
>  I expect they'll get published together.
> 
[Les:] The reference to draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis (rather than current RFC7810) was put in at the request of the AD. 
You are correct that this introduces a dependency between this document and 7810bis and this document will remain in MISSREF state until 7810bis is published.
As both drafts are in the review process we do not expect there to be a significant delay.

In any case this isn't a "major" issue is it? It seems worthwhile to have the reference be to the newer version of 7810 - and this certainly isn’t the only case where one document is dependent on another which has yet to be published.


> Minor issues: None.
> 
> Nits/editorial comments: Some wording on Section 3 could use some
> readability
> cleanup, perhaps.
> 
> [1] "represent the state and resources availability" does not somehow scan
> well
> for me. "state and resource availability"? "state and availability of
> resources"?
> 
[Les:] "state and resource availability" is fine with me.

> [2] "are assumed to have all the required security and authentication
> mechanism" also seems like it could read more smoothly.  "are assumed to
> have
> implemented all require security and authentication mechanisms..."?
>
[Les:] How about "assumed to support all the required..."
??

If you are OK with the suggestions I will publish an updated version very soon.

   Les

 
> I'm sure the editors will have better ideas.
>