Re: [Igmp-mld-bis] Initial version of Questionnaire

Olufemi Komolafe <femi@arista.com> Thu, 07 March 2019 22:11 UTC

Return-Path: <femi@arista.com>
X-Original-To: igmp-mld-bis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: igmp-mld-bis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 275331311B0 for <igmp-mld-bis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 14:11:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=arista.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 oI6k6VUXIZAS for <igmp-mld-bis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 14:11:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x431.google.com (mail-pf1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) (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 32E6D1310E7 for <igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Mar 2019 14:11:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x431.google.com with SMTP id j5so12525260pfa.2 for <igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 14:11:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=arista.com; s=googlenew; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=9txLvj+j2ut+2wlT15P3Ul371lgIxzbtRLspcxKvc7E=; b=hip85M7+zTO1GBGiVypevqZuwT8W31haab4zFIUKn/Vj2rdS4MYtrKBtMURfQDZ9iv mSHcXtOTflxaydcQp93QqSpgJ6Q8haVAVTGR+kwA+4VLlDK8/yOF8Y2WCJWglzaWGhAZ hvobtFS0lYHea+iwi5ndQsdJdsxLaX6bMujhhb04A12y1ni1mf2UZnJLyykUVwjE0/I1 uPw95zwS8EmmWlj9aEZGTl1uEbJK//5NM3CaXPSjhBCZoam/wtVIZ/qSEvaOWPqyESby dS1+IQNom52rVompPY+enTGalJ59tKAwl+iCU6ygXVqw/iB0T5nr7a3HDYYyiDBsHmTP 60gQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=9txLvj+j2ut+2wlT15P3Ul371lgIxzbtRLspcxKvc7E=; b=saegZFANKrEqifrWLK4vfxgKCkzKWdeFulAn/SOEs3/DhbBgSmDREy/lt3yQxHzUZl LN8J32p4fKhbUW1pWTEDbcGOxgZoLQyLwyhZiG3kWP0ANpYFcQzk6UBQGk9jiHqLqGVN Vw86e+RS3+c7TAQppUM9oS8hVJ2ScAydzoFnFlvhrzisxbtK8voakPWqsPR7sQvwnPA4 ZstoPVV11fs4fcSKAmbQ8yp4TMN3k8cin7rGAalq2JepMa56Y/38by1/k6HEjtlDuJqt AXg1fU4cmd6XCGFJFvg6RrxZtDUUtoxQWftG/GV05pHTmfdDNga/00isWlPLLiPjkfxl qzaQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWt1mkWStkRnB9QEjMftLcnXHpSRl4Izj+ul+3BhX0EU8l2tpst j4eWq8mVfY1zPvzyMDJdM3KwYQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyd9obQq+xc+qrt/W59x2vhCv5XQJ0CUAdURjpFDYP/WF3NlL3wqTwN6N38m4eU1CddPttfkw==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:d158:: with SMTP id c24mr13314776pgj.34.1551996676559; Thu, 07 Mar 2019 14:11:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.81] (host217-39-43-202.range217-39.btcentralplus.com. [217.39.43.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h184sm16314923pfc.78.2019.03.07.14.11.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 07 Mar 2019 14:11:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Olufemi Komolafe <femi@arista.com>
Message-Id: <D7A799CE-2FBD-4E4D-9208-F7036E40ED0F@arista.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C448ACE3-AF7D-4264-BD50-86C02685D263"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2019 22:11:27 +0000
In-Reply-To: <8CCB28152EA2E14A96BBEDC15823481A1CEBEDA4@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Cc: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" <mankamis@cisco.com>, "igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org" <igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org>
To: Michael McBride <Michael.McBride@huawei.com>
References: <16B07F66-593E-42D8-A8FE-FBEDCE94650F@cisco.com> <8CCB28152EA2E14A96BBEDC15823481A1CEBEDA4@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/igmp-mld-bis/FWyf5MPFUagdx1dRy2hw63K1eYk>
Subject: Re: [Igmp-mld-bis] Initial version of Questionnaire
X-BeenThere: igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <igmp-mld-bis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/igmp-mld-bis>, <mailto:igmp-mld-bis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/igmp-mld-bis/>
List-Post: <mailto:igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:igmp-mld-bis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/igmp-mld-bis>, <mailto:igmp-mld-bis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2019 22:11:19 -0000

Mankamana,

Thanks a lot for making a start with the draft.  I was going to edit some of the text.  Shall I just edit it directly or do you want me to list the suggested changes?

Also, more importantly, I think we really should structure the questions better.   I think structuring them will make it easier for the folks completing the question, help us get more insightful answers and make the analysis easier.  I had suggested some structure in the Wiki (e.g. dividing the questions into headings such as “Deployment Status”, “Deployment Specifics” and “Deployment Perspectives”  and similarly for implementation etc).  Please feel free to modify these headings or even propose new ones but I think that dividing the questions into such headings will improve the whole process.

Regards,
Femi

> On 7 Mar 2019, at 19:35, Michael McBride <Michael.McBride@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Mankamana,
>  
> Looking good. Please consider making the following changes:
>  
>        3- Do you know if your implementation is based on [RFC3376]
>  
> MM- Instead: “Is your implementation based on [RFC3376]?”
>  
>        4- Do you know if lightweight IGMPv3 [RFC5790] is deployed in your network ?
>  
> MM- Instead: “Is lightweight IGMPv3 [RFC5790] deployed in your network ?
>        7- Does any application uses Exclude mode with source list for MLDv2 ?
>                                                    ^^^
> MM-use
>  
>        8- Which part of IGMPv3 RFC 3376 is used more often ?
>  
> MM-Fairly wide open question. Perhaps that’s what you want. But the reader may need some guidance by following the existing question with something like “ex: INCLUDE/EXCLUDE source filtering, socket filtering, etc”
>  
>        10-Does your network still has deployment for IGMPv1 [RFC1112]?
>                                                         ^^^
>  
> MM- Instead: “Does your network still have IGMPv1 [RFC1112] deployed?”
>  
> Thanks,
> mike
>  
> From: Igmp-mld-bis [mailto:igmp-mld-bis-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2019 10:20 AM
> To: igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org
> Subject: [Igmp-mld-bis] Initial version of Questionnaire
>  
> Hi Team, 
> Please find the initial version of draft.  Attaching original nroff too, but you can optionally provide comment in text file directly, I can make the edit in nroff file.
>  
> Thanks 
> Mankamana 
>  
> -- 
> Igmp-mld-bis mailing list
> Igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/igmp-mld-bis