IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Isis-wg] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Tue, 09 February 2016 21:39 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B643B1B2A68 for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:39:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 n0ULYuP1dAPq for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:39:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70E2D1B2A61 for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:39:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD9B20CE6 for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 16:39:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 09 Feb 2016 16:39:50 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=NHKeekTqt1wW+xUiUb3lE4O/Vvo=; b=UhXwVA oRYzFbdIux2pcL8CBWHisJ0NlcjQrzuVTZzgR5kpar8S9+nvk2Kq9+gxfn1Zc1TV 5MvTT8bfF90Lrk4x2r9g2x0GRFy1UkQBgd7/cz17hqptv7hKwhCsCx5Nyz84AGkJ bLxPVKnYw7+qaTOC1wo+RJp+VBANRZRs7jFTQ=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=NHKeekTqt1wW+xU iUb3lE4O/Vvo=; b=dCd1z2BL/lzTrFDroFyGcIPl+QkU2Fs9MQ5IVy3gD8KeasA vgIleBkhSPDOTEcGGwjwxgwbgAbeVlPNo16zq9DLzL4/4sUKqrgEhnqbMlxw0N4o n3BdI7gpo6Uhs9Llq0eboCHi7AXQiMPnGrYvNa/y4sSJ0PFt9xXIu/6kyhTw=
X-Sasl-enc: Sn54h+IEkakjp4JhdqtFyuI7FJB7TbtArFF2iVcGpj+9 1455053990
Received: from dhcp-171-68-20-61.cisco.com (dhcp-171-68-20-61.cisco.com [171.68.20.61]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 921676800F1; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 16:39:49 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <D2DFB734.10E5DF%aretana@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 13:39:48 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <69162644-DF77-453F-98C9-A558E2F2F3C0@cooperw.in>
References: <20160202000623.2041.75747.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <0313B05C-9CAF-4629-A598-C97CFE33AF8F@cisco.com> <96D0C84E-DCAC-4905-B0C0-9085010CB7B1@cooperw.in> <F5E7BA79-8013-49F2-B6CA-93F971393B26@cisco.com> <870A3143-5031-4099-9B38-F64630024BD5@cooperw.in> <D2DFB734.10E5DF%aretana@cisco.com>
To: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/frsDsxB4hARTViecomrOg8yQOzQ>
Cc: "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions@ietf.org>, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)" <sprevidi@cisco.com>, "isis-chairs@ietf.org" <isis-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/isis-wg/>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 21:39:55 -0000

Hi Alvaro,

The changes look good to me. I think this (unchanged) text in Section 5 is still unclear though:

For sub-TLVs which include an A-bit (except min/max
      delay), an additional threshold SHOULD be included
      corresponding to the threshold for which the performance
      is considered anomalous (and sub-TLVs with the A-bit are
      sent). The A-bit is cleared when the sub-TLV's performance
      has been below (or re-crosses) this threshold for an
      advertisement interval(s) to permit fail back.

Why is the min/max delay sub-TLV exempted from this recommendation?

Thanks,
Alissa


> On Feb 9, 2016, at 12:33 PM, Alvaro Retana (aretana) <aretana@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> On 2/3/16, 12:24 PM, "Alissa Cooper" <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:
> 
>> Ok, this makes sense. I still think clarification is also needed in
>> Section 5.
> 
> Alissa:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> When you get a minute, please take a look at the update that the authors
> submitted today.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Alvaro.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email