[ippm] Review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-05
Jon Mitchell <jrmitche@puck.nether.net> Fri, 17 March 2017 19:01 UTC
Return-Path: <jrmitche@puck.nether.net>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86D6C1294E6; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 12:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jon Mitchell <jrmitche@puck.nether.net>
To: ops-dir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.47.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <148977726052.13049.17633302885192133866@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 12:01:00 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/AHCfo7w6w47G95oNVvZKmJn2V1g>
Subject: [ippm] Review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-05
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 19:01:01 -0000
Reviewer: Jon Mitchell Review result: Has Nits I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. Ready with Nits - this draft adds the ability to use PTP timestamps as an alternative to NTP timestamps for active performance measurement protocols OWAMP and TWAMP. Although this draft does a good job of discussing interoperability for both sides of the session having or not having support for this operational capability, in several places it states that if a send/receiver support this capability it must be set to 1 in the flags. However, only for TWAMP Light mode, this seems configurable. This may just be my interpretation, but it probably should state that local implementations MAY provide a configurable knob to not negotiate PTPv2 timestamps in section 2.1 and 2.2 even if the capability is supported by the implementation.
- Re: [ippm] Review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-f… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [ippm] Review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-f… Jon Mitchell
- [ippm] Review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-forma… Jon Mitchell
- Re: [ippm] Review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-f… Greg Mirsky