Re: Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-12

Greg Mirsky <> Fri, 13 January 2017 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0199D1294F5; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:12:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3cF4XR2wComD; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:11:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CEAE1293FC; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:11:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id j15so65413940oih.2; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:11:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1e7wI5aR61xg8PkqzCZqxqLRc+XxaDLudCYx0dNZpys=; b=BYkKPkPxIn9Y/wwcLuDwiFobDqvz6YrQrH5qSKBVbmonYWzaRJFqeGQXjhBz+uqXiz mHPA4H7jAJwS/VxZ9jcFK3RP9PgvsiP0T5K1pEzcq+097e91U20A9LVrnaCXb04cCCcf X6SYUaSXR5XMeiScMahQKjJjH9Gg9EZkykLDaXv55Wwz9wL7gkfe6MqUXFupSg+oIE+N wpr9qdEeRPov3S8pR+7QBh7Csb38XeY1clA9OPhtdu0XW6CiHQRPxjR4j6vOw7WlyEuN DxN/krdVo5ulZkqg+RzSHM1wSuTOoy6RIr9C/8tKCUxp7dXwFCB3xvGEaJhOJOyKoXp4 JkXg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1e7wI5aR61xg8PkqzCZqxqLRc+XxaDLudCYx0dNZpys=; b=LCawKzD9TtzoyB0haZL6+noseH7kZss2ZW0BYQMSGCJiSlO4oE+GhivI8tpgmBq/55 9kn/opGqIOEn4I1L+IGuZiUzHgCbVivs6HRt6Nbq7zR+Nm5ak7ZxFv5J/6JcoRGAECzo apdpuiQx2dXB9jHmWaQ/yW/0cqZBhIpmwl3gh3htfbKYqOZ8YcTcbz1CUs1MgWx1CcvI nnByWhlXohK26QB8A+AC8kS+amnM4UBuGIrTUs7w4t1VwqhghXlIdLURIfvY2acu868A DGuQZBF7tq0Wj+ZivhUS1rMs9Gd0hWsw9bRO+F3jC4ELGVAOH6fkskIh/fmeZ2liRQPM 9RKA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKZ1vD94yXcmNMDDMsnpGX12COhuQEKb1lZyyBXBC8dwojZ9SVl9Y9/DlaprwXnVQlARnjJDWgJfc0UOQ==
X-Received: by with SMTP id 5mr10743527oif.157.1484331117482; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:11:57 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:11:57 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
From: Greg Mirsky <>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:11:57 -0800
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-12
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c18d080fc98c60545fdc44b"
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>,,, "" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 18:12:01 -0000

Hi Jurgen,
thank you for the thorough review and the most detailed and helpful
We're preparing -13 version and will address your comments promptly. Please
find my responses in-lined and tagged GIM>>.


On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 12:47 AM, <"Jürgen Schönwälder
<j.schoenwaelder@jac"> wrote:

> Reviewer: Jürgen Schönwälder
> Review result: Has Nits
> I do not see any major OPS related issues. I am not an MPLS expert
> and
> this will likely show in my comments. Most of my comments below are
> editorial or trying to make the document easier to read for first
> time
> readers not deeply involved in the work.
> - Consider to avoid acronyms in the Abstract. I had to lookup what
>   G-ACh and PTP resolve to in order to read the abstract, which I
>   think should be avoided.
GIM>> Will use full versions in the Abstract.

> - The sentence starting 'I.e.' in parenthesis in the Introduction
>   almost reads like a definition of Residence Time. Is it useful to
>   have this sentence in parenthesis and starting with 'I.e.'? It
> would
>   be nice to have a clear definition of Residence Time. In fact, my
>   reading is that residence time sometimes refers to the per hop
>   residence them and sometimes to the accumulated per path residence
>   time. Does it make sense to distinguish a Node Residence Time from
> a
>   Path Residence Time? Or a Residence Time from an Accumulated
>   Residence Time?
GIM>> Perhaps if parenthesis removed and the sentence starts with
"Residence Time can be calculated as the sum ..."

> - While reading section 3, I was wondering what are 1-step nodes and
>   what are 2-step nodes? This is later explained in detail inq
> section
>   7. Perhaps it makes sense to introduce the concept earlier and to
>   provide a forward pointer to section 7 for the details.
GIM>> Will try to re-arrange the text to make the flow more logical.

> - I suggest to either always write one-step and two-step or 1-step
> and
>   2-step. Mixing writing styles makes searching in the text a bit
> more
>   complicated.
GIM>> Will pick and use one form throughout the document.

> - The document seems to be PTP specific even though there are
>   provisions to support other time synchronization protocols. I
>   wonder, though, to what extend this would work for lets say NTP.
>   There is quite some text refering to the correctionField, which
>   seems to be a PTP-specific field.
GIM>> Yes, NTP doesn't use residence time and thus no need for
correctionField. We assume that there may be interest in using RT by NTP at
some time.

> - s/Scratch Pad filed/Scratch Pad field/
GIM>> Great catch, thank you!

> - Does the Interface ID related to other interface numbers, e.g.,
>   SNMP's ifIndex? Or is this an entirely separate number space? Or
>   does it depend on the implementor's choice?
GIM>> This comes from PTP. AFAIK, it is different from SNMP index.

> - In section 7, enumerated item 1, there is a hanging open
> parenthesis
>   which seem to have to sub-items inside. I suggest to change this by
>   s/forthcoming (this/forthcoming. This/
GIM>> Accepted, thank you.

> - In section 8.3: s/.  .  /.  /
GIM>> Done

> - It may be useful to add instructions that the RFC editor is
> expected
>   to replace TBAx in the text once IANA has done the assignments.
> - What does 'particularly as applied to use related to PTP' mean?
GIM>> My interpretation would be "when used to measure the residence time
on behalf of PTP"