Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06

Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> Mon, 08 February 2016 11:18 UTC

Return-Path: <ggx@gigix.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 382E11AD072 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 03:18:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, 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 rKgIxoT9aJvh for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 03:18:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x232.google.com (mail-wm0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::232]) (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 79BC61AD065 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 03:18:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x232.google.com with SMTP id 128so150397842wmz.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 03:18:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gigix-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=JR9Iddw1yutdkixWNI2+EPgaQC+gAgRYvbcA/699bLI=; b=mncua8mCv4EjOETRsXeX+I5A17lL99Mk7/bHc8Q61K1Q4eKldDwvrF8AonZ9FdmUkR EkJd4Z10QaRDEoMhWzMWSLRi31/rqQsnteXACN+Ep51SwqL635JV41Vvc/WQRman1XNg uCFNxip/Z8ackqrHXiu8RCloA0Y3Zc79lr64y26o/SeXv2sGlqYLgBuMPflwMV6aNWy4 My7jMdrZpaLYV91+OGE5xKBCIaJrUqDlFD9n0a1gmvc1nlMh4/PgbPhAENTHoKy95lpY KRnL8yXiHE1egaAPvu3sttNWAE308fOOSd+0Vz8rcUX2ymwaRvNFDgHGxBhTG/vLX9Du C4BA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=JR9Iddw1yutdkixWNI2+EPgaQC+gAgRYvbcA/699bLI=; b=gL7/PJrjJU/5NSOsrZxfi8Xxq20HJ51TTLhzdCqVeRkKSgTTwiNqFJ1Y/hjMDFt0XA 4pe8KyfYqsSW7zU9mOgl1hJbiCiCgEPIZ779FObdXlVXfIoMQKvWE9P/i1guyd7PcymD RKia/nkj19pTQKj5s3lMgHwCLbAi3pEGEqvM3IxzG2EZeNpMRMWmZcKBRIyprjDo1DnU c7UMP+9ZJpuoxNFYJBZuQNDrJKTkuhnRjrFg42b49EDOCXWCkhec0FOeTJJyXzNWMx5U THiVebzHlxmV0NGZ9m6L8O/kaCUqkhClUIpFtnl+NtWUaDi8jtHhegm4fNimfXKfEXLj UdLg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOR4xoxTGur0CScq7G3yXlHYz5RPIQfRl5+8LHlNq1+2+9D4Jl+jx2aViSV40qW0pA==
X-Received: by 10.28.109.150 with SMTP id b22mr32272593wmi.27.1454930315106; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 03:18:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:660:330f:a4:5e:7763:f908:e6f7? ([2001:660:330f:a4:5e:7763:f908:e6f7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id gb9sm29204574wjb.26.2016.02.08.03.18.33 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Feb 2016 03:18:34 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06
From: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
In-Reply-To: <30DBBD82-6F32-4D05-B1D6-0E2564855ED7@gigix.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 12:19:03 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B3384C62-EE51-4E80-9A75-B49AD16172C9@gigix.net>
References: <004001d1608f$ef60e6b0$ce22b410$@akayla.com> <30DBBD82-6F32-4D05-B1D6-0E2564855ED7@gigix.net>
To: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Xw1XIbH-gLrTbha851M6vQohMC8>
Cc: draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt.all@tools.ietf.org, gen-art@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 11:18:38 -0000

> On 08 Feb 2016, at 12:17, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> Back in April we indeed did not sent you a specific feedback. 
> Reason is that we received several comments/reviews and batched everything in a new I-D, with sending specific feedback to all.
> 

The correct sentence is: “without sending specific feedback to all”

I should really start to proofread my mails before hitting the send button  ;-)

ciao

L.

> Yet, if you are unsatisfied on how we addressed the issues we certainly need to do more work.
> 
> Give me some time to go again thoroughly through your first review and I’ll get back to you with a specific feedback.
> 
> Thanks for your time spent on this document.
> 
> ciao
> 
> L.
> 
> 
> 
>> On 06 Feb 2016, at 04:39, Peter Yee <peter@akayla.com> 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 treat these comments just like any other last call
>> comment.  For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>
>> 
>> Document: draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06
>> Reviewer: Peter Yee
>> Review Date: February 5, 2016
>> IETF LC End Date: February 5, 2016
>> IESG Telechat date: February 18, 2016
>> 
>> Summary: This draft has serious issues, described in the review, and needs
>> to be rethought. [Not ready]
>> 
>> The draft attempts to specify the framework for the management of
>> experimental LISP EID sub-prefixes, but really could use some additional
>> work to flesh out the management aspects that are left unsaid.
>> 
>> This draft fixes only two minor nits I raised in my review of the -04
>> version.  Nothing else has been addressed, nor have I received any feedback
>> on that review.  In light of this, I have little new to add.  It is possible
>> that the agreement between the IANA and the RIPE NCC will alleviate the
>> major concern I had with the draft, but not being privy to that agreement, I
>> can't make that determination.
>> 
>> My original review with the unaddressed comments can be found here:
>> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/msg11620.html
>> 
>> 
>> 
>