Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-05

[Donald Eastlake <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alexey,

On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Alexey Melnikov
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>
>
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you
> may receive.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-05
> Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov
> Review Date: 3 August 2014
> IETF LC End Date: 21 July 2014
> IESG Telechat date: 7 August 2014
>
> Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
> [Ready with nits]
>
> Major issues: None
>
> Minor issues:
>
> Section 6.4: who allocated opcodes? I.e. is there a registry?

These OAM OpCodes were created by and originally all under the control
of IEEE 802.1; however, 802.1 allocated the block of 32 OpCodes from
32 to 63 to ITU-T as documented in [802.1Q]. I don't think ITU-T
maintains an explicit registry other than the listing of assigned
OpCodes out of their range that appears in [Y.1731] but I could be
wrong.

Perhaps a sentence could be added to the end of Section 6.4 such as
"These OpCodes are from the range of values that has been allocated by
IEEE 802.1 [802.1Q] for control by ITU-T."

> Nits:
>
> I think it would be better to say that all "Reserved" fields are set to 0 by
> the sender and ignored by the receiver.

I'll check with the other authors on that.

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