IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-egress-protection-14

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 07 March 2018 17:58 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 3D589120726; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 09:58:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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=l5H/WE+c; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Z4nMS1Tm
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 klAFFNReJPta; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 09:58:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79540120725; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 09:58:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0C92076B; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 12:58:38 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 07 Mar 2018 12:58:38 -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=fm2; bh=PjEKdEy4RS3bL/NMC60oLXFCZ1o+o Iy079NoRZJ8iJw=; b=l5H/WE+cEEtVplbM0bBIavP0sBNdfLuiC++i+dJCk/TdE Vc8/zBc78JRdNrOPGoY6c2luv3523RZ36K/YvaNXL4NhQrmfRfplwvf2C1Gr1APq X4aObAwH/DkMT3wNiBG3/0KjGmPaYhrXKMkPTC4+HJSJDoIoDrPr/C1Enka4oujM MgkWyuLBbCiTcvJ8WfKiQT5A0CvZIw7xZ9Vm+OlUthLtPr0vwdh5GO4tFYnFOw1u FuijMlefgvGo/BlRPRgipbsCRofOcT0t+0wUJ7Wcmtm0W4nI80F1+Kzz4WlX/MyR 2mOVyLdG2XZ+jK8reV7FgGS8211wC6kKS4zN5exYg==
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=fm2; bh=PjEKdE y4RS3bL/NMC60oLXFCZ1o+oIy079NoRZJ8iJw=; b=Z4nMS1TmoVEwGsKryv3DQE 49QyNSFnT+yau12Tr9+3ABbY5TAyOp0QqQs/OE2xsPXQ2pjUNG3hDS9yqZyOS7OV iR4FNHKboReQSiFpxGZDw2+/Hz9YUJ4J9jhSUzVLZGMLq3vcrK2TDwMpKubaQtdN pt3lwz0GmMI9v0W7bef/tYl8I8o+Lk4vg3KIpPDjubVph4JVMea3fKTdmIffzSNP /nXOfqIT7Teo8A97Hz4y9kIrWnYnnceDQ+QuixTDPtpPaTRJyqDWx84V4MJzHTRi NIl0jg58jN89tVQ5jeMqnZB7yBZ4VEBgZihnDHWP5qsB4OpM8lrGlCEYa3JkoQUg ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:TiigWkD_SU1W7jO5NzZownUe-nCTPZ85xwIfzUG04gG2V4J4d7nuSw>
Received: from [10.19.234.245] (unknown [128.107.241.170]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9DA2F7E46B; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 12:58:37 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D463A57036@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 12:58:35 -0500
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-egress-protection.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-egress-protection.all@ietf.org>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8415A341-61E0-48B5-AC5D-BBDC924A0A3D@cooperw.in>
References: <152027834027.31747.14180175871085676142@ietfa.amsl.com> <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D463A57036@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com>
To: Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com>, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/xsZX1bpb0VNOAHJkKZDCRno9rN8>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-egress-protection-14
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, 07 Mar 2018 17:58:41 -0000

Stewart, thanks for your reviews of this document. Huaimo, thanks for your responses. I have entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa

> On Mar 5, 2018, at 4:44 PM, Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Steward,
> 
>    Thank you very much for your time and your valuable comments.
>    We have updated the document to address the nits according to your suggestions.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Huaimo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stewart Bryant [mailto:stewart.bryant@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 2:32 PM
> To: gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-egress-protection.all@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; teas@ietf.org
> Subject: Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-egress-protection-14
> 
> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
> 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 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
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-egress-protection-??
> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
> Review Date: 2018-03-05
> IETF LC End Date: 2018-02-27
> IESG Telechat date: 2018-03-08
> 
> Summary: This is much improved since the earlier version I reviewed.
> 
> I do have a concern about the use of the term "egress" when I think that it should be "egress node" or some such other network object.
> 
> Major issues: None
> 
> Minor issues: None
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> The authors often use the term egress on its own when I think they mean egress PE or egress node or egress LSR. If my English concern is correct, this should be addressed before this goes to the RFC Editor else  Auth48 will be a painful process for all concerned.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email