[ippm] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-ippm-rfc8889bis-03: (with COMMENT)
Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 22 September 2022 06:18 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
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 8FE70C152704; Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ippm-rfc8889bis@ietf.org, ippm-chairs@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org, tpauly@apple.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 8.16.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Murray Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <166382753358.11688.10669500371176890065@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:18:53 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/JQXTuucXFxOK4VVeezeJJnYlOfs>
Subject: [ippm] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-ippm-rfc8889bis-03: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 06:18:53 -0000
Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ippm-rfc8889bis-03: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-rfc8889bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for the work on this. It was pretty easy to follow. In Section 5, the document suddenly starts using the term "arc". What's an arc? Two problems in Section 9. The first: One flag: packet loss measurement MUST be done as described in Section 6 by applying the network clustering partition described in Section 5. While delay measurement MUST be done according to the Mean delay calculation representative of the multipoint path, as described in Section 7.1.1. Single-marking method based on the first/last packet of the interval cannot be applied, as mentioned in Section 7.2.1. The "While delay ..." sentence seems to be incomplete. Should it be attached (via comma) to the sentence before it, or is there something missing here? The same problem occurs in the next ("Two flags:") paragraph. The second problem is the SHOULD in that same paragraph. SHOULD presents the implementer with a choice, and I suggest adding some prose here to explain why one might legitimately decide to do something other than what the SHOULD says. Lastly, some nits: In Section 5: In addition, it is also possible to leverage [...] You don't need both "In addition" and "also". In Section 7.2.1: Double marking or multiplexed marking work but only through statistical means. [...] s/work/works/ If it is performed a delay measurement for more than one [...] Suggest "If a delay measurement is performed for more than one ...". In Section 9: ... there is different kind of information that can be derived. Missing "a", I believe? For example, to get measurements on a multipoint-paths basis, one flag can be used. While, to get measurements on a single-packet basis, two flags are preferred. Suggest removing "While".
- [ippm] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-i… Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker
- Re: [ippm] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on dra… Giuseppe Fioccola