Re: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-pals-mpls-tp-mac-wd

["Andrew G. Malis" <[e-mail]>]

Himansu,

Looks great to me, thanks.

Ralph and Alia,

Please review the updates.

Thanks,
Andy

On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Shah, Himanshu <[e-mail]> wrote:

> *Ok, I updated the section. Please review.*
>
>
>
> *Thanks,*
>
> *Himanshu*
>
>
>
> *From:* Andrew G. Malis [mailto:[e-mail]]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 03, 2015 1:24 PM
> *To:* Shah, Himanshu
> *Cc:* Ralph Droms (rdroms); A. Jean Mahoney; Alia Atlas <[e-mail]>
> ([e-mail]); General Area Review Team;
> [e-mail]; The IESG
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-pals-mpls-tp-mac-wd
>
>
>
> Himanshu,
>
>
>
> Section 6.2 isn’t quite right yet. Here’s some suggested text instead:
>
>
>
> 6.2.  Sequence Number TLV
>
>
>
> This document requests IANA to assign a new TLV Type (requested value
>
> 0x0001) from the existing LDP "TLV Type Name Space" registry. The
>
> description for the new TLV Type is "Sequence Number TLV”.
>
>
>
> Note to IANA (TO BE REMOVED BY THE RFC EDITOR): This registration should
>
> take place at the following location:
>
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/ldp-namespaces/ldp-namespaces.xhtml]. In
>
> an earlier revision of this draft, we created a new sub-TLV registry
>
> with one entry, a new "Sequence Number TLV" with the value 0x0001. This
>
> has been implemented by several vendors. The IESG proposed that rather
>
> than create a new sub-TLV registry, we simply allocate a new TLV Type from
>
> the existing LDP "TLV Type Name Space" registry. In this registry, the
>
> value 0x0001 is available for allocation by standards action, so we
>
> request this code point for the new "Sequence Number" TLV type to avoid
>
> needing to change the existing implementations.
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 4:24 AM, Shah, Himanshu <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Ralph and Alia -
>
> Ralph - I have replace the sequence number/mac withdraw sub-TLV
> registration,
> Section with request for the value 0x0001 from the LDP's TLV type name
> space.
> Please review and verify that it addresses your concern.
>
> Alia - I have also addressed your concern by replacing the original text
> with
> Steve Bryant's offered text (which you stated you were OK with). Please
> review,
> verify and accept by removing "DISCUSS" on this draft review.
>
> Thanks,
> Himanshu
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shah, Himanshu
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 7:05 PM
> To: 'Ralph Droms (rdroms)'
> Cc: Andrew G. Malis; A. Jean Mahoney; General Area Review Team;
> [e-mail]; The IESG
> Subject: RE: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-pals-mpls-tp-mac-wd
>
> Hi Ralph -
>
> You make a good point on the sub-TLV.
> I have talked to my WG chairs and we are going to change the text based on
> your suggestion.
> I will remove the MAC Withdraw sub-TLV registry for sequence number TLV
> and instead use the Value from the LDP Type values (same as MAC List TLV).
>
> As for combining text of section 3 and 4.1.
>
> Section 3 described the packet fields, including the sequence number text.
> The reason for sequence number text is - that it is applicable to both;
> Sender (section 4.1) and Receiver (section 4.2).
>
> I will explore to remove the overlap..
>
> Thanks,
> Himanshu
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Droms (rdroms) [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 3:13 PM
> To: Shah, Himanshu
>
> Cc: Andrew G. Malis; A. Jean Mahoney; General Area Review Team;
> [e-mail]; The IESG
> Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-pals-mpls-tp-mac-wd
>
> Himanshu - I've been tied up in meetings most of the day today and am
> about to go into more meetings that will last until the end of the day.
>
> I reviewed your revised draft briefly and it mostly looks OK.  I have one
> substantive comment, which is about an issue I didn't notice until now:
>
> How is the Mac Withdraw sub-TLV registry from which the "Sequence Number"
> code point is taken differentiated from the LDP Parameters sub-TLV registry
> from which the "MAC List" and "MAC Flush Parameter" code points are taken?
> In other words, how does the receciver know to interpret the code point on
> the Sequence Number TLV as a code point in the Mac Withdraw sub-TLV
> registry while the code points on the MAC List TLV and the MAC Flush
> Paramter TLV are interpreted as code points in the LDP Paramteres sub-TLV?
> Shouldn't all the code points on the TLVs in this message come from a
> single registry?
>
> I also have an editorial comment from my earlier review: the ifrst
> paragraph of section 3 is mostly redundant with section 4.1 and that text
> in section 3 should be merged into the text in section 4.1
>
> - Ralph
>
> > On Oct 26, 2015, at 2:09 PM 10/26/15, Shah, Himanshu <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Andy.
> > He did re-send the email without MIME and I was able to read and reply.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Himanshu
> >
> > From: Andrew G. Malis [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 2:08 PM
> > To: Shah, Himanshu
> > Cc: Ralph Droms (rdroms); A. Jean Mahoney; General Area Review Team;
> > [e-mail]; The IESG
> > Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-pals-mpls-tp-mac-wd
> >
> > Himanshu,
> >
> > Ralph said:
> >
> > Himanshu - I've received your revised draft.  I've been stuck in a
> variety of meetings Monday and haven't had time to review it.  I should be
> able to look at it before the end of the day.
> >
> > - Ralph
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Shah, Himanshu <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Can you send the email without MIME signature?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Himanshu
> >
> > From: Ralph Droms (rdroms) [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 1:02 PM
> > To: Shah, Himanshu
> > Cc: A. Jean Mahoney; General Area Review Team;
> > [e-mail]; The IESG
> > Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-pals-mpls-tp-mac-wd
>
>
>