Re: [Isis-wg] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-09: (with COMMENT)

["Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)" <[e-mail]>]

On Feb 3, 2016, at 10:21 PM, Barry Leiba <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-09: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I've only a couple of minor comments to add to what my colleagues have
> already said:
> 
> -- Section 1 --
> 
>   For links, such as Forwarding Adjacencies, care must be taken
> 
> With the first comma, the qualifier "such as Forwarding Adjacencies" is
> only parenthetical.  I think you're *specifically* talking about "links
> such as Forwarding Adjacencies" here, so you need to remove that comma.


yes. 


> -- Section 5 --
> 
>   Min and max delay MAY be the lowest and/or highest measured value
>   over a measurement interval or MAY make use of a filter, or other
>   technique, to obtain a reasonable representation of a min and max
>   value representative of the interval with compensation for outliers.
> 
> Making sure this normatively says what you want it to:
> What this says is that min and max delay can be anything anyone wants it
> to be, with no restrictions at all, because there are only 2119 "MAY" key
> words here, and "MAY" means optional.  Specifically, it means that min
> and max do NOT have to have any resemblance to any reasonable
> representations.
> 
> What I think you *mean* to say is that they each MUST be one of two
> things: either taken from measured values or be reasonable
> representations.  You can freely choose between those, but they have to
> be one or the other.  Is that correct?
> 
> If that's correct, then you need to say it in some manner such as this:
> 
> NEW
>   Min and max delay MUST each be derived in one of the following ways:
>   by taking the lowest and/or highest measured value over a measurement
>   interval, or by makeins use of a filter or other technique to obtain
>   a reasonable representation of a min and max value representative of
>   the interval, with compensation for outliers.
> END


indeed, that’s what intended. 

Thanks for the suggestion, I’ll update the draft with your proposed text.

s.


> 
>