IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-sfc-hierarchical-08

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Wed, 13 June 2018 09:15 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.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 27830130EDF; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 02:15:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 gSj6bpXzVQgH; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 02:15:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from orange.com (mta241.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.66.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D154130E18; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 02:15:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfedar03.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.5]) by opfedar24.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 9EAF0C0EFA; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 11:15:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.3]) by opfedar03.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 7E1C718006C; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 11:15:27 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM5D.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::9898:741c:bc1d:258d%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0389.001; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 11:15:26 +0200
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>, "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-sfc-hierarchical.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-sfc-hierarchical.all@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "sfc@ietf.org" <sfc@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-sfc-hierarchical-08
Thread-Topic: Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-sfc-hierarchical-08
Thread-Index: AQHT8VGLlh+NMdzUK0Sk0czeyKklNKReCxTw
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:15:26 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302DF35797@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <152694106121.7908.13286903159935171274@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <152694106121.7908.13286903159935171274@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.2]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/sFuKuiRdwbd8d8cRDT_hgKoLCpw>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:15:33 -0000

Hi Ines, 

Thank you for the review (Apologies for the delay to reply to this review). 

All your comments were taken into account. Please the new version at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sfc-hierarchical/ 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Ines Robles [mailto:mariainesrobles@googlemail.com]
> Envoyé : mardi 22 mai 2018 00:18
> À : rtg-dir@ietf.org
> Cc : draft-ietf-sfc-hierarchical.all@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; sfc@ietf.org
> Objet : Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-sfc-hierarchical-08
> 
> Reviewer: Ines Robles
> Review result: Has Issues
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft.
> The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts
> as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special
> request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing
> ADs.
> For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
> ​http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
> 
> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it
> would
> be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call
> comments
>  that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by
> updating
>  the draft.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-sfc-hierarchical-08
> Reviewer: Ines Robles
> Review Date: 05-21-2018
> Intended status: Informational
> 
> Summary:
> 
> I believe the draft is technically good. This document is well written and
> clear to understand. The figures are clear and helpful. The draft presents
> some
> minor issues that I think should be resolved before publication.
> 
> Comments:
> 
> Major Issues: No major issues found.
> 
> Minor Issues:
> 
> - It would be nice to add a terminology section that references section 1.4
> of
> rfc7665, section 1.3 of rfc8300 (since you are using NSH-aware defined there)
> and add definitions such as IBN. - Question: about this sentence in pag. 3:
> "...The "domains" discussed in this document are assumed to be under the
>    control of a single organization...". Is it the same if we say "...The
>    "SFC-Enabled Domains" discussed in this document are assumed to be under
> the
>    control of a single organization ..."?
> Nits:
> -- It would be nice to expand NSH in the Introduction section.
> -- In Figure 1, it would be nice to add a number to the Classifiers,
> e.g.CF#1,
> then when you mention that in the text you can reference it, e.g. "One path
> is
> shown from edge classifier (CF#1) to SFF1 to Sub-domain#1..." -- In Figure 6,
> it would be nice to add in the legend section the meaning for DPI.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ines.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email