Re: [Idr] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-08

Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com> Thu, 24 June 2021 14:38 UTC

Return-Path: <dromasca@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92E7E3A1F0F; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 07:38:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=gmail.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 POusjPgou4IB; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 07:38:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2f.google.com (mail-io1-xd2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2f]) (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 178093A1F11; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 07:38:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2f.google.com with SMTP id k16so8404819ios.10; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 07:38:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=596xWTUWDUNajC15p6jA1ZgfKxAwK9f4GXGdnvWT6+8=; b=KPzIhzv7n8jqW2b6Em3V7gskF9S7HMDJPCW9QubFWYZw2FSxXDQNXNoWsHT14j8LAD 9msqV5gUc4sjQ0y8EHqWAgu8MRqiqMwP3BxyF6lQz2BVVGnIPe5so4Slek4yCizVvmRT i+bdNOXGpjq7uXwAH2H3e43ljXfrEvXJJhT1RfIEcqCS3aX2fvWTeRAtRFUPzlr0vDd/ p97si1wCBC44UrElAivpb/IvsoZPUpIz9n+HJuQG9EwV9M9kInaaTJDVY9HmH/uiNDY9 JEgmjFt4BrXLQr0RkVWLyHdP5ZqJjwSm7gztcF3ifDka+bSSEcEGbCiUkAYjcr6Z60nU KAYA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=596xWTUWDUNajC15p6jA1ZgfKxAwK9f4GXGdnvWT6+8=; b=PjoBcC5rH0P/3lvLm4QxZY3aRHnangi1FLwqd127AEUmON5PZ3I4ZGtQPbOwPvEBIg q74Y+++cPwEP7czQGYSGPuequqb5jmhaxEQHPlFkQXDOwcYJYjQBBHDUE/a51rgHaz/m sh+kSuIuuz2aG386HQ9aMHBYpgJZ9toHsph2SHsdxKh2FqDQKxQtqSTxgUtjOwcha/Xv 9AQ7vpHe0xAOOqhZNrjKVjczSDww2U+q/jr4Vkm4DUgKOJY/wMnSd5MAVQexGkPYCHjO hoDDe3fL3kXfQPJyo4bph3/av6YIh1hofjhy8+5AuRHuzhoXZKSd6giGJQw/WHm+Jf6g vlew==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5324x7CcPeegxuzG/O/tgLFMhLpUtRjViGQTG/8UfqVmjSM3FAxZ SBoZDXqsdDTbERNzWTBamaoD4v7U4glA4BCxGxM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwdQNfqyS2mgGutgsu8CCeTnLI/hSBR21NZU6CMUk7Boz8rkHT3ajO8l0BGlsMfKQPrasB/EkBm5Acnq98nNPQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:a10:: with SMTP id z16mr4391836ioi.70.1624545505824; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 07:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <162452258621.12182.5634245405194434970@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAFgnS4WJTWtqaujy9=72OVu-JsinSLWu6E8cyP-DLCRv52NAPw@mail.gmail.com> <MW3PR11MB4570AB2393E2AA4E1ACF0670C1079@MW3PR11MB4570.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MW3PR11MB4570AB2393E2AA4E1ACF0670C1079@MW3PR11MB4570.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From: Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 17:38:14 +0300
Message-ID: <CAFgnS4VDg8PYE4Pk2-TyEg4s5yr9B5z7t9Y3FQt1553TMkWEuQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <ketant@cisco.com>
Cc: "ops-dir@ietf.org" <ops-dir@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext.all@ietf.org>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cbd10105c583f9c7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/xHGm5rBHmj0de9GgAJJabgD2CHU>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-08
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:38:32 -0000

Hi Ketan,

Thank you for the answer and for addressing my concern. I recognize it's a
matter of preference, and that reading is easier for folks very familiar
with the topics. As I do not belong to the category I had to go back and
forth several times through the companion and referenced documents. Finding
terms and abbreviations in one place makes life easier for me and readers
like me. You did quite a good job in expanding acronyms at first reference,
there were still a few misses like NLRI, PSP, USP. There may be other.

I hope this helps.

Regards,

Dan


On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 3:17 PM Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <ketant@cisco.com>
wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
>
>
> Thanks a lot for your review and feedback.
>
>
>
> Regarding your comment; we’ve chosen to expand all abbreviations on first
> use in the document instead of an abbreviation section. It is possible that
> we might have missed something or not added references for them. It would
> help a lot if you could point to a few such instances so we can fix them.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ketan
>
>
>
> *From:* Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* 24 June 2021 16:25
> *To:* Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com>
> *Cc:* ops-dir@ietf.org; draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext.all@ietf.org;
> idr@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-08
>
>
>
> In the second paragraph, I meant Section 10.
>
>
>
> Sorry for skipping that.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 11:16 AM Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <
> noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> Review result: Ready
>
> Ready with one editorial comment.
>
> The document is well written, but it requires good familiarity with BGP-LS
> and
> also reading 4 companion documents which are all work-in-progress. My
> principal
> editorial comment would be that an abbreviations section (with references
> to
> the sources of the terms) would greatly improve readability and make the
> life
> easier for future users of the document.
>
> I appreciate Section of the document which describes the operations and
> manageability aspects following the recommendations of RFC 5706. This is
> the
> section in the document that must be read by operators. Note that it looks
> short but is actually quite rich in information and refers to a few other
> documents.
>
>
>