[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-mpls-02

Bob Briscoe <rbriscoe@jungle.bt.co.uk> Thu, 18 October 2007 12:56 UTC

Return-path: <gen-art-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiUv5-0003QO-IA; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:56:11 -0400
Received: from gen-art by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IiUR1-0005hl-59 for gen-art-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:25:07 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiUQz-0005fz-2u for gen-art@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:25:05 -0400
Received: from smtp3.smtp.bt.com ([217.32.164.138]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiUQs-00074x-Rm for gen-art@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:25:05 -0400
Received: from i2kc08-ukbr.domain1.systemhost.net ([193.113.197.71]) by smtp3.smtp.bt.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:24:37 +0100
Received: from cbibipnt08.iuser.iroot.adidom.com ([147.149.100.81]) by i2kc08-ukbr.domain1.systemhost.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:24:34 +0100
Received: From bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk ([132.146.168.158]) by cbibipnt08.iuser.iroot.adidom.com (WebShield SMTP v4.5 MR1a P0803.399); id 119271027386; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:24:33 +0100
Received: from mut.jungle.bt.co.uk ([10.73.149.31]) by bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk (8.13.5/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l9ICOITC021874; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:24:30 +0100
Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.2.20071018131436.02c17e60@pop3.jungle.bt.co.uk>
X-Sender: rbriscoe@pop3.jungle.bt.co.uk
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:24:21 +0100
To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com
From: Bob Briscoe <rbriscoe@jungle.bt.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <B356D8F434D20B40A8CEDAEC305A1F2404BC39B8@esebe105.NOE.Noki a.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Spam-Score: -1.36 () ALL_TRUSTED
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 132.146.168.158
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Oct 2007 12:24:34.0526 (UTC) FILETIME=[D7932FE0:01C81181]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0a7aa2e6e558383d84476dc338324fab
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 08:56:09 -0400
Cc: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com, bsd@cisco.com, gen-art@ietf.org, lars.eggert@nokia.com, june.tay@bt.com, jmpolk@cisco.com
Subject: [Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-mpls-02
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org

Pasi,

Thanks for this.

1/ Not so sure about RFC4301 not being normative. I think normative means 
"this spec /could/ have a dependency on the referred to aspect of RFC4301", 
which is true...

If the aspect of RFC4301 that we are referring to (copy ECN field on 
encapsulate) was changed, e.g. for some security reason, we would have to 
seriously consider changing our recommendation to mirror such a change to 
IPSec into ECN-MPLS.

This is not an impossibility either, because the choice made in RFC4301 was 
on a balance between two possible forms of harm - missing upstream 
congestion information and creating a covert channel.

So I think normative is correct in this case, and it certainly does no harm.

2/ Certainly "(equal cost multi-path - ECMP)" would be better.


Bob

At 12:10 18/10/2007, Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote:
>I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
>reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
>http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
>
>Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call
>comments you may receive.
>
>
>Document: draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-mpls-02
>Reviewer: Pasi Eronen
>Review Date: 2007-10-18
>IETF LC End Date: 2007-10-19
>IESG Telechat date: (not known yet)
>
>Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC.
>
>Comments:
>
>I'm not an expert in MPLS or PCN, but even then, the draft was
>surprisingly understandable (good writing, folks!).
>
>Couple of minor suggestions:
>- RFC 4301 should probably be informative rather than normative
>reference
>- The acronym "ECMP" should be expanded on first use
>
>Best regards,
>Pasi

____________________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe, <bob.briscoe@bt.com>      Networks Research Centre, BT Research
B54/77 Adastral Park,Martlesham Heath,Ipswich,IP5 3RE,UK.    +44 1473 645196 




_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art