Return-Path: X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F0A61A7013; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:18:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 t4ACtllw42dU; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:18:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x236.google.com (mail-wi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84A361B310E; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:18:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wicgb1 with SMTP id gb1so13656122wic.1; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:18:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=bNJAqLMRX0QnzwaysO/5G3zJV42pDRuvTukwtGqM+18=; b=QClWUHNKrJHKTIt26ON1GCXB6plc07xb1I6tHKcmMqoTNMtLFKIEzOQkE/fqNYWuq0 z63LnYra9akgIuyJiKDON+YY4h5RvwoEbOuZcUE77RNKOboW2RlTIGRIdUxjIDXXE4gC y4zXa4k63/0glQqtSzmcs4GdQaJHKYHkeWUvVaBw5vqqZYZP9nVT5bgAUCrvNSE8q9ds wWK+CAxXD84CIvyUB7dKnApG5cu5zZ9gxuMhb3UNqjRggZ+oRByZhUMqlUodBUvcCdNf jIm1ZeyRiIeEhejy+VByKjbRsaw2PDy0GaynmuMend2QKxCvdq6Cpgv3yIgtmhKUdZ63 w6Ag== X-Received: by 10.180.87.138 with SMTP id ay10mr5693135wib.12.1445008695687; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:18:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.9.212 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:17:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <012701d10821$ead2edd0$c078c970$@akayla.com> References: <00f301d107b7$6db17110$49145330$@akayla.com> <012701d10821$ead2edd0$c078c970$@akayla.com> From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 17:17:56 +0200 Message-ID: To: Peter Yee Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044480950108b705223a4ea8 Archived-At: Cc: General Area Review Team , draft-ietf-pals-ms-pw-protection.all@ietf.org, IETF Discussion , "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A \(ATTLABS\)" Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC/Telechat review of draft-ietf-pals-ms-pw-protection-03 X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:18:20 -0000 --f46d044480950108b705223a4ea8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Peter, Thanks again, I'll take of those acronyms. Cheers, Andy On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Peter Yee wrote: > Andrew, > > > > Regarding Appendix A, that may just be my lack of deep > understanding for the MPLS-TP world. If you feel the differentiation is > covered, leave it as is. > > > > Acronyms that might merit expansion include PE (as used in > T-PE and S-PE), PSN (one meaning is well-known, the other not), CE (several > possible expansions for this one), and G-Ach. > > > > Kind regards, > > -Peter > > > > *From:* Andrew G. Malis [mailto:agmalis@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Friday, October 16, 2015 1:55 AM > *To:* Peter Yee > *Cc:* draft-ietf-pals-ms-pw-protection.all@ietf.org; General Area Review > Team; IETF Discussion; BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS) > *Subject:* Re: Gen-ART LC/Telechat review of > draft-ietf-pals-ms-pw-protection-03 > > > > Peter, > > > > Many thanks for your review. My response is inline: > > > > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 4:07 AM, Peter Yee wrote: > > 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 > . > > Document: draft-ietf-pals-ms-pw-protection-03 > Reviewer: Peter Yee > Review Date: Oct-15-2015 > IETF LC End Date: Oct-15-2015 > IESG Telechat date: Oct-22-2015 > > Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication as a Standards Track > RFC, but has nits (and a question) that should be fixed before publication. > [Ready with nits] > > The draft provides two mechanisms that can be used to provide protection to > static Multi-Segment Pseudowires against failure of switching Provider Edge > nodes. I'm not familiar enough with the topic to determine if the > mechanism > works as easily as described in the draft, but the concept helpfully does > not require invention of new protocols, so a determination of suitability > shouldn't be difficult for MPLS experts to make. > > Question: Wouldn't it make sense to provide some explanation in Appendix A > for why it exists and when it should be used? Currently it's just offered > as an alternate approach without real guidance. > > > > Appendix A applies to those MPLS-TP networks that are using the PSC > protocol for linear protection. We though that was pretty clear in the > first paragraph of the appendix. I'll see if we can make that more clear. > > > > > Major issues: None > > Minor issues: None > > Nits: > > General: > > Expand all acronyms on initial use. Some of them are probably well-known > in > the MPLS community, but their expansion wouldn't hurt either. > > > > Could you be more specific? On a quick check, the only acronyms I'm seeing > that aren't expanded are MPLS and MPLS-TP, which are included in the > well-known acronym list at > https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt . > > > > > Specific: > > Page 4, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: replace "MS PW" with "MS-PW" to match > other usage in the document. > > Page 4, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: append commas after "which" and > "PWs". > > Page 4, 3rd paragraph, 1st sentence: replace the comma with a semicolon. > > Page 8, Section A.2, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: append a comma after > "link". > > Page 8, Section A.2, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: append "entity" at the > end > of the sentence. As it is, the sentence ends ambiguously in an adjective. > > Page 8, Section A.2, 3rd paragraph, 1st sentence: change "a SS-PW" to "an > SS-PW". > > > > Thanks for the close read, we'll fix these nits. > > > > Cheers, > > Andy > > > --f46d044480950108b705223a4ea8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Peter,

Thanks again, I'll take of t= hose acronyms.

Cheers,
Andy
<= div class=3D"gmail_extra">
On Fri, Oct 16, 20= 15 at 4:49 PM, Peter Yee <peter@akayla.com> wrote:
=

Andrew,

=C2=A0=

=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0 Regarding Appendix A, that may just be my lack of deep understand= ing for the MPLS-TP world.=C2=A0 If you feel the differentiation is covered= , leave it as is.

=C2=A0

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Acronyms that might merit expansion= include PE (as used in T-PE and S-PE), PSN (one meaning is well-known, the= other not), CE (several possible expansions for this one), and G-Ach.

=C2=A0

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Kind regards,<= /p>

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -Peter

=C2=A0

From: Andrew G. Malis [mailto:agmalis@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 1:55 AM
To: Peter Yee
<= b>Cc: draft-ietf-pals-ms-pw-protection.all@ietf.org; Genera= l Area Review Team; IETF Discussion; BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS)
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC/Telechat review of draft-ietf-pa= ls-ms-pw-protection-03

=C2=A0

Peter,

=C2=A0

Many thanks for your review. My response is inline:<= /p>

=C2=A0

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 4:07 AM, Peter Yee <peter@akayla.com>= wrote:

I am the assigned Gen-ART r= eviewer for this draft. The General Area Review
Team (Gen-ART) reviews a= ll IETF documents being processed by the IESG for
the IETF Chair. Please= wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD
before posting a n= ew version of the draft.

For more information, please see the FAQ at=
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq<= /a>>.

Document: draft-ietf-pals-ms-pw-protection-03
Reviewer: = Peter Yee
Review Date: Oct-15-2015
IETF LC End Date: Oct-15-2015
I= ESG Telechat date: Oct-22-2015

Summary: This draft is basically read= y for publication as a Standards Track
RFC, but has nits (and a question= ) that should be fixed before publication.
[Ready with nits]

The = draft provides two mechanisms that can be used to provide protection to
= static Multi-Segment Pseudowires against failure of switching Provider Edge=
nodes.=C2=A0 I'm not familiar enough with the topic to determine if= the mechanism
works as easily as described in the draft, but the concep= t helpfully does
not require invention of new protocols, so a determinat= ion of suitability
shouldn't be difficult for MPLS experts to make.<= br>
Question: Wouldn't it make sense to provide some explanation in = Appendix A
for why it exists and when it should be used?=C2=A0 Currently= it's just offered
as an alternate approach without real guidance.

<= div>

Appendix A applies to those MPLS-TP networks tha= t are using the PSC protocol for linear protection. We though that was pret= ty clear in the first paragraph of the appendix. I'll see if we can mak= e that more clear.


Major issues: None

Minor issues: None=

Nits:

General:

Expand all acronyms on initial use.=C2= =A0 Some of them are probably well-known in
the MPLS community, but thei= r expansion wouldn't hurt either.

=C2=A0


Specific:

Page 4, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: replace "M= S PW" with "MS-PW" to match
other usage in the document.<= br>
Page 4,=C2=A0 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: append commas after "= ;which" and "PWs".

Page 4, 3rd paragraph, 1st sentenc= e: replace the comma with a semicolon.

Page 8, Section A.2, 1st para= graph, 1st sentence: append a comma after
"link".

Page = 8, Section A.2, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: append "entity" at t= he end
of the sentence.=C2=A0 As it is, the sentence ends ambiguously in= an adjective.

Page 8, Section A.2, 3rd paragraph, 1st sentence: cha= nge "a SS-PW" to "an
SS-PW".

=C2=A0

Thanks for the close read, we'll fix these nits.

=C2=A0

Cheers,

Andy

=C2= =A0


--f46d044480950108b705223a4ea8--