Re: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-use-cases-11

[H Y <[e-mail]>]

Hi Peter,

Thank you for your very careful review.

We modified the draft to address the comments, and you can see the diff here.
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-use-cases-12

Please see inline.

2022年9月21日(水) 14:54 Peter Yee via Datatracker <[e-mail]>:

>
> Reviewer: Peter Yee
> Review result: Ready with Nits
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
>
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-use-cases-11
> Reviewer: Peter Yee
> Review Date: 2022-09-20
> IETF LC End Date: 2022-09-20
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>
> Summary: This document gives use cases showing how RFC 9244 can be employed for
> to convey DOTS telemetry. It seems perfectly fine as an informational adjunct
> to RFC 9244, giving more involved examples.
>
> Major issues: None.
>
> Minor issues: None.
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> Page 3, section 3, 1st paragraph: insert “the” before “DOTS telemetry
> specifications” and change “specifications” to “specification”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 4, section 3.1.1, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: delete “such”. Change “is”
> to “are”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 4, section 3.1.1, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “recent” to
> “recently”. Change “Tps” to “Tbps”, unless you believe that 1 transaction per
> second is a lot of traffic. One tablespoon might be. ;-)
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 7, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “identifies” to “identify”. Change
> “of” to “about”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 7, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: delete the first two commas (bracketing
> “then”).
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 7, section 3.1.2, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “under attack time”
> to “at the time of an attack”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 9, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “of” to “on”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 9, 1st paragraph, 4th sentence: delete “each”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 9, 1st paragraph, 5th sentence: change “atribute” to “attribute”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 10, section 3.1.3, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: delete “an”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 12, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “of” to “about”. Delete “a” after
> “using”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 12, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: delete “On the other hands,” and
> capitalize the ‘t’ in “the”. Insert “the” before “volume”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 12, section 3.1.4, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: delete the comma after
> “Short”. Change “internet” to “Internet”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 12, section 3.1.4, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: considering inserting
> “salient” before “feature”. Insert “it” before “start” and change “start” to
> “starts”. Change “go” to “goes” in both occurrences in the sentence. Insert
> “then” before “ back to maximum”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment, considering Genart and Artart last
call review comments.


OLD:
The feature of the attack is that start from zero and go to maximum
values in a very short time span, then go back to zero, and back to
maximum, repeating in continuous cycles at short intervals.

NEW:
These attacks start from zero and go to maximum values in a very short
time span, then go back to zero, and then back to maximum, repeating
in continuous cycles at short intervals.

>
> Page 12, section 3.1.4, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: delete “for them”. Insert
> “such” before “an attack”. Change “by” to “using a”. Change “it” to “this”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment, considering Genart and Artart last
call review comments.

OLD:
It is difficult for them to mitigate an attack by DMS by redirecting
attack flows because it may cause route flapping in the network.

NEW:
It is difficult for the transit providers to mitigate such an attack
with their DMSes using a redirecting attack flows because this may
cause route flapping in the network.

>
> Page 12, section 3.1.4, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: insert “the” before
> “attack traffic”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 14, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: change “rate-limit” to “rate-limiting of”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 14, 2nd paragraph: change “gatherd” to “gathered”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 15, section 3.1.5, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: change “suspecious” to
> “suspicious”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 15, section 3.1.5, 1st paragraph, 4th sentence: delete “an”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 15, 3rd paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “as below” to “that”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 15, 3rd paragraph, 3rd sentence: add a comma after “total attack
> connection”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 17, Figure 11: change “vulnerbilities” to “vulnerabilities” twice.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 19, 1st paragraph, 4th sentence: delete the two commas bracketing “then”.
> Change the first space after “e.g.” to a comma.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 19, section 3.2, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “counter measure” to
> “countermeasure”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 19, section 3.2, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: change “counter measure” to
> “countermeasures” (note the plural).
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 19, section 3.2, 2nd paragraph, last sentence: append a comma after
> “”total attack traffic percentiles”. Change “detail” to “details”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 21, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: insert “the” before
> “total-pipe-capacity”. Insert “the” before “DOTS”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 22, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: change “mitugation” to “mitigation”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 22, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: change “reports” to “report”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 22, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “system” to “systems”, presuming
> that there can be more than one DMS reporting to the orchestrator. For the
> words “sends them”, what does “them” mean? I’m assuming that the orchestrator
> creates a single, integrated, deduplicated report, so I’m not sure what “them”
> is.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

We clarified the meaning of "them".

OLD:
After that, the orchestrator integrates the reports from the DDoS
mitigation system, while removing duplicate contents, and sends them
to a network administrator by using DOTS telemetry periodically.

NEW:
After that, the orchestrator integrates the reports from the DDoS
mitigation system, while removing duplicate contents, and sends the
integrated report to a network administrator by using DOTS telemetry
periodically.

>
> Page 22, section 3.3.1, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: change “internet” to
> “Internet”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 22, section 3.3.1, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: delete “On the other hand,”
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 22, section 3.3.1, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: on the assumption that
> multiple flow connectors are allowed, as shown in Figure 16: change
> “collector’s” to “collectors’”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 22, section 3.3.1, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “collector” to
> “collectors” on the same assumption as the previous comment. If that assumption
> is incorrect, ignore both comments. Also considering changing the figure to
> have a single flow collector shown in that case.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

We assume that multiple flow collectors are allowed as shown in Fig. 16.

>
> Page 25, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: delete the two commas bracketing “then”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 25, section 3.3.2, 2nd sentence: insert “a” or “the” before “baseline”.
> Insert “the” before “DMSes”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 25, section 3.3.2, 3rd sentence: change “collector” to “collectors”.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 25, Figure 18: I’m not sure what “[ Dst ]” means. It doesn’t appear
> elsewhere in this specification or in RFC 9244. Perhaps “destination”?]
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

>
> Page 26, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: I can’t parse this sentence. Consider
> rewriting it.
[Yuhei]
Thanks. I addressed this comment.

OLD:
The forwarding nodes carry out mirroring traffic destined IP address.

NEW:
The forwarding nodes carry out traffic mirroring to copy the traffic
destined a IP address and to monitor the traffic by a DMS.
-