RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> Thu, 29 August 2013 10:05 UTC
Return-Path: <mach.chen@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4794321F9FB1; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 03:05:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zBOdid8HmWI5; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 03:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE05821F8411; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 03:05:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AWR99230; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 10:05:35 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 11:04:28 +0100
Received: from SZXEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.95) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 11:05:17 +0100
Received: from szxeml558-mbs.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.196]) by szxeml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.95]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:05:13 +0800
From: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
To: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>, "draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping.all@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12
Thread-Index: Ac6j72iTQaEc2KyVR6aJXw9+GJi+EwAZqLIAAA8JaoD//4fDgP//cOtg
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 10:05:12 +0000
Message-ID: <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE255C285CA@szxeml558-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE255C28238@szxeml558-mbs.china.huawei.com> <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE255C284D5@szxeml558-mbs.china.huawei.com> <04cf01cea499$22eb4a80$68c1df80$@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <04cf01cea499$22eb4a80$68c1df80$@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.96.176]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 10:05:43 -0000
Hi Roni, How about this: " No assignments of sub-TLVs in the range of 0-16383 and 32768-49161 are made directly for TLV Type 21, sub-TLVs in these ranges are copied from the assignments made for TLV Type 1 and kept the same as that for TLV Type 1. All sub-TLVs in these ranges (include existing and future defined) defined for TLV Type 1 apply to TLV Type 21. Assignments of sub-..." Best regards, Mach > -----Original Message----- > From: Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 5:21 PM > To: Mach Chen; draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping.all@tools.ietf.org > Cc: ietf@ietf.org; gen-art@ietf.org > Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of > draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12 > > Hi, > I am not sure you responded to my latest email. > > Having the policy for TLV type 1 here is not enough in my view since I only > look at RFC4379 and create a new TLV type I will not know that I have to > register it also for the type 21 if it will not be mentioned > > As for the vendor specific see my other email > Roni > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mach Chen [mailto:mach.chen@huawei.com] > > Sent: 29 August, 2013 11:33 AM > > To: Roni Even; draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp- > > ping.all@tools.ietf.org > > Cc: ietf@ietf.org; gen-art@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of > draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp- > > ping-12 > > > > Hi Roni, > > > > Thanks for your detailed review and comments! > > > > Please see my reply inline... > > > > > From: Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 9:06 PM > > > To: draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping.all@tools.ietf.org > > > Cc: ietf@ietf.org; gen-art@ietf.org > > > Subject: Gen-ART LC review of > > > draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12 > > > > > > 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-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping-12 > > > Reviewer: Roni Even > > > Review Date:2013-8-28 > > > IETF LC End Date: 2013-9-4 > > > IESG Telechat date: > > > > > > Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard track > RFC. > > > > > > > > > Major issues: > > > Minor issues: > > > I am not clear on the sub-TLV in section 6.2 1. If a new sub-TLV is > > > defined for TLV type 1 do they need also to be added to TLV type 21. > > > This should be clear, and if there is some relation I think it should > > > be reflected in the IANA registry for TLV type 1 > > > > Yes, type 21 TLV intends to reuse existing and future defined sub-TLVs for > > type TLV 1. And in Section 3.3, it has already stated this, it says: > > > > "The Target FEC sub-TLVs defined in [RFC4379] provide a good way to > > identify a specific return path. The Reply Path TLV can carry any > > sub-TLV defined for use in the Target FEC Stack TLV that can be > > registered." > > > > So, for Section 6.2, to make it cleaner and more explicit, how about this > > change: > > > > Old: > > > > " No assignments of sub-TLVs in the range of 0-16383 and 32768-49161 > > are made directly for TLV Type 21, sub-TLVs in these ranges are > > copied from the assignments made for TLV Type 1. Assignments of > sub-..." > > > > New: > > > > " No assignments of sub-TLVs in the range of 0-16383 and 32768-49161 > > are made directly for TLV Type 21, sub-TLVs in these ranges are > > copied from the assignments (including existing and future allocations) > > made for TLV Type 1. Assignments of sub-..." > > > > > > > 2. For the vendor or private use why a difference policy than the rest > > > of the sub-TLV registry > > > > This document does not make any changes to the "Vendor and Private use" > > definition, range and policy as defined in RFC4379. In RFC4379, it's > policy is > > defined different from other ranges. > > > > > > > > Nits/editorial comments: > > > 1. In section 3.4 I assume that "TC" is traffic class. It will be good > > > to expand and have reference. > > > > OK, will fix it when all last call comments received. > > > > Best regards, > > Mach
- Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-… Roni Even
- Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-p… Loa Andersson
- RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-p… Roni Even
- RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-p… Mach Chen
- RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-p… Roni Even
- RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-p… Mach Chen
- RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-p… Roni Even
- Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-p… Loa Andersson
- RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-p… Roni Even
- Re: Gen-ART LC review ofdraft-ietf-mpls-return-pa… t.p.
- RE: Gen-ART LC review ofdraft-ietf-mpls-return-pa… Roni Even