Re: [lisp] draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14

Fabio Maino <fmaino@cisco.com> Mon, 20 August 2018 18:56 UTC

Return-Path: <fmaino@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B159C130EE8 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 11:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 HjxcWvq-h5lQ for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 11:56:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11ACB130ED7 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 11:56:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9793; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1534791411; x=1536001011; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to; bh=3aM96SvEvpGzNVRUZ6Svj1BNKXl5ZHGgftpRSU7Wf9o=; b=ck7SlHFlYw2fo4K5w1SyRVcYu7xF4l8kHkfa1leK1mqFccx7pyV56by0 2HV+m3pfZONRCQuAHuLdRYGFeTSFVNHXVaHxIpFAMlsjXTpAUpaLOWsHa g/RRKQ3Xnsuii/58W2orheMc+7Ffkvfib9Qfd45hKYTnRpfnnSiAaWuw2 Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BJAQDMDXtb/4YNJK1bGgEBAQEBAgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEIAQEBAYMgBSpjfyiDcIgKjB2BYC2IUYgbhSsUgWYLGAEKhEkCg00hNBg?= =?us-ascii?q?BAgEBAgEBAm0cDIU4AQEBAwEBIQRHGwsYKgICIQYwEwYCAQGDHgGBaQMVD6d?= =?us-ascii?q?zezMfhEmCNw2DLAWJGBeBQT+BEieCa4JWRQEBgUmDGYJXAo13hEmIESsJjFC?= =?us-ascii?q?DCgYViECFeItthzuBQTiBUjMaCBsVGiGCaYM2AQiHVoVeHzCOfAEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.53,266,1531785600"; d="scan'208,217";a="160078680"
Received: from alln-core-12.cisco.com ([173.36.13.134]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Aug 2018 18:56:50 +0000
Received: from [10.32.173.123] ([10.32.173.123]) by alln-core-12.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w7KIunLs018481 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 18:56:49 GMT
To: lisp@ietf.org
References: <6515577E-31A8-45DC-90DA-59C43817EAB7@sobco.com> <D7DCB6AE-D9AA-48E9-8D5C-FA7E7169E155@gmail.com> <600E5518-F884-42DA-80F2-4CF650C6BA60@sobco.com> <F5DF64DA-7974-456A-AC57-A25D160F253A@gmail.com> <4BAEBA48-2435-4B26-9A45-493A259E6250@sobco.com> <75299534-B274-40F4-AACB-F72105B2E248@gmail.com> <FE16C3DB-4B94-4B15-A377-0137F2A3F044@sobco.com> <EAC5E3BA-AFF7-4187-96C3-72B82CF5DAE0@gmail.com>
From: Fabio Maino <fmaino@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <b96b5656-cbcf-5a5e-26a7-811e248f8ae6@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 11:56:50 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <EAC5E3BA-AFF7-4187-96C3-72B82CF5DAE0@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------6F4EFDA164A484E7BD117341"
Content-Language: en-US
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.32.173.123, [10.32.173.123]
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-12.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/LOvhuXpGUWS79m6XFEibCONO4Ew>
Subject: Re: [lisp] draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 18:57:01 -0000

Looks good Dino.

Noted one nit in section 18, not worth spinning a new version IMO:

"The is 1 remaining bit" -> "The 1 remaining bit"

Fabio


On 8/20/18 11:42 AM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
> WG, here is a diff with changes to reflect Scott’s comment. I wanted the list of implementator to-be-aware changes to get working group quick review.
>
> I’m about to add a “Changes since RFC 6833” section to RFC 6833bis as well.
>
> Thanks,
> Dino
>
>
>
>
>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 9:03 AM, Scott O. Bradner <sob@sobco.com> wrote:
>>
>> a specific section only dealing with the changes since the RFC is best
>>
>> there is too much noise in the per iteration log (which as you already note should be removed)
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 8:57 AM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Note we do have a Document Change Log in Appendix B detailing the changes put in each version starting with RFC6830. Would that suffice? Or you still think a specific section is required?
>>>
>>> Dino
>>>
>>> <PastedGraphic-9.png>
>>>
>>>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Scott O. Bradner <sob@sobco.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> it would be best to have a section called “changes since RFC 6830” so there is no ambiguity that the section covers the changes
>>>>
>>>> it would be fine to have that section just say “See  “Implementation Considerations.”
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 8:26 AM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Dino
>>>>>>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There were little changes that an implementor would need to know about for the data-plane. But there were for the control-plane (i.e. RFC6833bis). But in either case, we’ll add a section in each bis document.
>>>>>> thanks - even if the section says “nothing to worry about” it will be useful
>>>>> I’ll title it “Implementation Considerations” and place it between 17 and 18?
>>>>>
>>>>> 14. Multicast Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  29
>>>>> 15. Router Performance Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30
>>>>> 16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  31
>>>>> 17. Network Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
>>>>> 18. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you going to be reviewer for 6833bis as well?
>>>>>> not assigned that yet but I will take a look
>>>>> I will try to get the sections done in the next day or so. I’m at the 3GPP meetings this week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dino
>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>> Dino
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 6:14 AM, Scott O. Bradner <sob@sobco.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was just assigned to do a ops-dir review of  draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> this is not the review - that will come soon
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> but since this is a “bis” document that is to replace an existing RFC it needs to have a
>>>>>>>> “changes since RFC 6830” section so that implementors of the earlier RFC will be able to tell
>>>>>>>> what they need to change to bring their code up to date without having to compare the
>>>>>>>> RFCs line by line (and likely miss something)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Scott
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lisp mailing list
> lisp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp