Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13
Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Thu, 07 May 2020 07:54 UTC
Return-Path: <ppsenak@cisco.com>
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 E6A5A3A09F1; Thu, 7 May 2020 00:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 Fq5rlBo6uP-w; Thu, 7 May 2020 00:54:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30CA13A07F7; Thu, 7 May 2020 00:54:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3791; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1588838042; x=1590047642; h=from:subject:to:cc:references:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3wgxOeB77Yv+gw8Cf4n7UgqaNnZakyM7Y9O+spvWgoY=; b=EoF4eflBEflQYn4b15bhFLce6460aumubIP4x4qTg0UqkSufNh81zr9x TwJJPWuKNsyFwe6WWyyvrtXtSQbgwDPRaU72zmfc+IODvcDjJQZkX71cc TBWzkPIcy99nJbtQz0SpOT8S8C4GWMekzOq+B/aHmsGws3anPyQ6J5VIi s=;
X-IPAS-Result: A0DMAwA3vbNe/xbLJq1mHAEBAQEBAQcBARIBAQQEAQFAgUeDGFUgEoRNiQGHWwglm14LAQEBDiMMBAEBhEQCgig4EwIDAQEBAwIDAQEBAQUBAQECAQUEbYVWDIVxAQEBAQIBIw8BBTMOBQsLFAQCAiYCAlcGAQwIAQGDIgGCXCAPr0J2gTKFUINOgToGgQ4qjF6BQT+BEAEnDIJdPoJnAoR3gmAEjmyTX5AGglKCcIUoj3gGHYJbiGGEVI0QkBeJVJNwgWkigVYzGggbFRqDC08YDZlIhUQ/A2cCBgEHAQEDCZABLIIZAQE
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,363,1583193600"; d="scan'208";a="23634346"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 07 May 2020 07:54:00 +0000
Received: from [10.60.140.51] (ams-ppsenak-nitro2.cisco.com [10.60.140.51]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0477rxQ0029193; Thu, 7 May 2020 07:54:00 GMT
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
To: Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>, gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, lsr@ietf.org
References: <158877512992.25308.14489968716385236242@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-ID: <5f206fd3-8918-9c1f-e403-8591c54acf83@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 07 May 2020 09:53:59 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <158877512992.25308.14489968716385236242@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.60.140.51, ams-ppsenak-nitro2.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/wPsPYUssoi81njF9SrrcKmU1GWM>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 07 May 2020 07:54:05 -0000
Hi Elwyn, please see inline: On 06/05/2020 16:25, Elwyn Davies via Datatracker wrote: > Reviewer: Elwyn Davies > Review result: Ready with Nits > > 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 treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13 > Reviewer: Elwyn Davies > Review Date: 2020-05-06 > IETF LC End Date: 2020-05-05 > IESG Telechat date: 2020-05-21 > > Summary: > Ready with nits. Aside: I have to say that the convolutions and > cross-referencing of doing the OSPF and IS-IS extensions plus BGP-LS added to > the cross-linking with MPLS is leading to mind-blowing complexity. Sooner or > later something is going to blow up here! > > Major issues: > None > > Minor issues: > None > > Nits/editorial comments: > > Abstract and title : The application to BGP-LS (s5) is not mentioned in the > abstract or the title. Also the first use of BGP-LS needs to be expanded. Why would the BGP-LS need to be mentioned in the abstract? I have expanded the first use of BGP-LS > > Abstract: s/tunnel/LSP/ done > > s1: Suggest s/SR-MPLS/Segment Routing with the MPLS Data Plane/ > > s1: Query: As a non-expert in this area, I was wondering if the signalling > capability is or will be implemented in IS-IS? A brief comment on the status > wrt IS-IS would be helpful. [It turns out that you already reference the > document that implements this later in this draft.] yes, it is being added to ISIS. Yes, this draft reference the ISIS draft. I see no reason to to include ISIS draft status in this document though. > > s1, last sentence: s/it's/it is/ done > > s3: It would be a good idea to expand 'prefix' to 'address prefix > advertisement' on its first occurrence here. Thereafter 'prefix' is fine by me. "prefix" is being used in almost all OSPF and ISIS document, we never use address prefix. > > s3, para 3: Why would a router not advertise the ELC with all prefixes? Can > you say why this ought not to be a MUST. advertising ELC property with prefix advertisement is optional. We can not mandate it. It would make all routers not advertising this data violating this spec. > > s4, para 3: In that case, what does the absence signify? Should we care? the absence of ERLD-MSD advertisements only indicates that a node does not support advertisement of ERLD It can not be interpreted that ERLD is not supported. Old nodes that do not advertise ERLD-MSD can not be assumed not to support non-zero ERLD. > > s4, para 4: > This needs a correction and a reference to where the Link MSD Sub-TLV is > defined. As a matter of interest, is there any reason why this should be sent > in an OSPF context? If not why not just prohibit sending it? If it is received > should it provoke an error rather than being ignored? OLD: When the ERLD > MSD-Type is received in the OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 Link MSD Sub-TLV, it MUST be > ignored. NEW: > When the ERLD-MSD type is received in the OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 Link MSD Sub-TLV > [RFC8476], it MUST be ignored. done. > ENDS > > s5: This section needs to be rewritten to be 'future proof' rather than > referring to the temporary allocations. A note about the temporary allocations > can be added with a RFC Editor note requesting its removal on final publication. I suppose you meant section 6 - IANA Considerations. I have updated the IANA section. thanks, Peter > > > > >
- [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-o… Elwyn Davies via Datatracker
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… Elwyn Davies
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Gen-art] [Lsr] Genart last call review of dr… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Gen-art] [Lsr] Genart last call review of dr… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… elwynd
- Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ie… Peter Psenak