Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname-05

[Donald Eastlake <[e-mail]>]

See below:

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Russ Housley <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Donald:
>
>>>> Document: draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname-05
>>>> Reviewer: Russ Housley
>>>> Review Date: 2015-08-24
>>>> IETF LC End Date: 2015-09-01
>>>> IESG Telechat date: unknown
>>>>
>>>> Summary: Almost Ready
>>>>
>>>> Major Concerns:
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> (2)  Also, in Section 5.2, Step 1, I think the intended sort order depends on all
>>>> of the LAALP IDi values being represented with the same number of bits.
>>>> Since Section 9.1 provides a variable length field to carry a LAALP ID value, I
>>>> assume that they are not always the same length.  Is a step needed to
>>>> encode the LAALP ID to a consistent length?
>>>
>>> [MZ] The sort is done in the per-LAALP base. It's not necessary to make the LAALP ID to a constant length. Besides, the 'mod' function always returns a value in [0, k-1] whatever the length of LAALP ID is.
>>
>> We could add "considering System ID and LAALP ID as byte strings".
>
> I am not sure that is enough unless all of the System IDs are the same length.
>
> Russ

I believe that currently all LAALP IDs are 8-byte System Identifiers
as specified in Clause 6.3.2 of IEEE Std 802.1AX-2014 used for MC-LAGs
or DRNIs; however, there could be other kinds in the future. Perhaps
the draft should say that the LAALP ID needs to be unique across the
TRILL campus, that it is a System Identifier as above if it is
8-bytes, and that the meaning for other length is reserved. But that
doesn't really answer the sort order or mod arithmetic questions.

How about just saying that they are treated as unsigned integers with
the bytes in network order?

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [e-mail]