IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases-11

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 13 December 2017 20:26 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 A6658126FDC; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 12:26:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=bM00e6f/; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=QgK9OdJC
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 3Knf6cuW1eia; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 12:26:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1B72128792; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 12:26:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5364F20A7C; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:26:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:26:00 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=mHs5ohcE4pihOMHml9qDdYjii5t9u yTiQ7E6ovmkEAg=; b=bM00e6f/Utjw40eIRsUj+gvFENs3UVESrh8FPdhsS3Rrc OaoIRLBE8qVwsqMZ1u0irRuhpVB9rqDQnzqpaTiIaWC90YQn3FrSRVawGnHy9ibT fLfeCMZjBnq8aTIS0QaLy5K7d/XoG3+M2HASGf77wM3EQZ71ED1OdCmK7uh8iOY1 bKxC6zn9CyCgqI73TI/UuYmHNnNfqx7h1A+/VRKbf063jQca4ynZRfzeUX0uFyTh R7fAGSLigYOsTT209Nwiuty1aCqJN7oXCQdJlHb14PCRW9ZhKbhG1t7YJ47YPZG3 VvoVgq8xF6Isj9NV8EeXb4D5oLqf7pvOw4fPMctSw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=mHs5oh cE4pihOMHml9qDdYjii5t9uyTiQ7E6ovmkEAg=; b=QgK9OdJCucg1SnHwB1yPft 2HtzFr/pPsQIsSvBC4bjMNJ9YS+cW/HT47lJHZUI3jz1w3CaoASC/cZ/fFnZgDCw /Yu7JG1geIV8GX26JQY3/yEEOQ1LOOxbhpOlwfwAmiNwmOh7nmRCQmBOohXEaRLN eXigDflR0kJel3cxPwgjPizaZQzIY8RJOg4liogZJ9P5rGjlHTU31KxQgxfDAq30 T6kuxD1JwFZTEATErVdB4WLfvB6lE8rBR2ckiTZfSWmnHBVI4B7go0xauwG7DH+E F+b0XLL2lKdXovNEX7Gj2q0ySHoHOPFrxH0QGw6XZXmQDmLRmZ8yYogurZ0R64fw ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:2IwxWleEDq_rXcs7ADAigTUL949MTfCsKLI-q4qA3yQONEIoKw9IZg>
Received: from sjc-alcoop-8816.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.241.187]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 23ADE245F0; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:25:58 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <0920656E-31EF-43F7-888C-15E41D6B46FD@previdi.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:25:58 -0500
Cc: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, gen-art@ietf.org, spring@ietf.org, draft-ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases.all@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E68F420B-B5B9-4420-8795-CBCB506929D9@cooperw.in>
References: <151035635006.437.7091503683528981768@ietfa.amsl.com> <0920656E-31EF-43F7-888C-15E41D6B46FD@previdi.net>
To: stefano previdi <stefano@previdi.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/rLJC2wpFN5DanydpwURgxxHExZQ>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases-11
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 20:26:03 -0000

Brian, thanks for your reviews. Stefano, thanks for your responses. I have entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa

> On Nov 14, 2017, at 4:58 AM, stefano previdi <stefano@previdi.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Brian,
> 
> thanks for the comments. See answers below.
> 
> 
>> On Nov 11, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
>> Review result: Ready
>> 
>> Gen-ART telechat review of draft-ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases-11
>> 
>> 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 wait for direction from your
>> document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
>> 
>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>> 
>> Document:  draft-ietf-spring-resiliency-use-cases-11.txt
>> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
>> Review Date: 2017-11-11
>> IETF LC End Date: 2017-05-04
>> IESG Telechat date: 2017-12-14
>> 
>> Summary: Ready
>> --------
>> 
>> Comment:
>> --------
>> 
>> When I reviewed this for Last Call, I had two general concerns:
>> 1) Is it useful to publish use cases now, at the end of
>> protocol development?
> 
> 
> this is an old story and you should probably read the archives of the spring mailing list ;-) 
> 
> To give you a summarized version of it, I’d say that yes, it makes sense to have the use-case properly documented. Resiliency is one of the major network operator use-case in segment routing networks and vendors are required to provide solutions for it. Having a document which can be pointed to and that describes the typical use case and requirements helps the reader in understanding how the component of the SR architecture address these requirements.
> 
> 
>> 2) The AD review dated 2017-04-20 pointed out that the
>> document should be historically consistent.
>> 
>> I'm going to assume that since the AD is bringing the draft
>> to the IESG, he's now happy on these two points.
> 
>> 
>> Minor issue:
>> ------------
>> 
>> I originally commented that Section 3 doesn't actually mention
>> any specific requirements for Spring. In conversation with
>> Stefano:
>> 
>>>> Right, but you don't state any *requirements* for SPRING that result from this case,
>>>> except the very general statement before section 3.1. Maybe that does translate
>>>> into specific requirements, but I don't see how.
>> 
>>> the generic requirement is the ability to instantiate source routed paths.
>>> These source routed paths, in the framework of this draft, are for LFAs.
>> 
>> I still think that Section 3 doesn't identify this requirement.
>> Maybe it's obvious to one skilled in the art, however. So
>> I'm going to say "Ready”.
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> s.
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email