Re: [lisp] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-6834bis-10: (with COMMENT)

[Luigi Iannone <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lars,

Thank you very much for reviewing the draft.
A few answers inline.

> On 25 May 2022, at 10:57, Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-lisp-6834bis-10: 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-lisp-6834bis/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> # GEN AD review of draft-ietf-lisp-6834bis-10
> 
> CC @larseggert
> 
> ## Comments
> 
> ### Section 6, paragraph 8
> ```
>     1.  V1 = V2 : The Map-Version numbers are the same.
> 
>     2.  V2 > V1 : if and only if
> 
>           V2 > V1 AND (V2 - V1) <= 2**(N-1)
> 
>           OR
> 
>           V1 > V2 AND (V1 - V2) > 2**(N-1)
> 
>     3.  V1 > V2 : otherwise.
> ```
> Shouldn't this include cases for if either V1 or V2 is the Null Map-Version?
> 

You actually do this if V1 and V2 are not Null Map-Version. Will add a sentence to clarify.

> ### Section 6.1, paragraph 0
> ```
>  6.1.  The Null Map-Version
> ```
> It might have been cleaner to actually define a one-bit "Null
> Map-Version" flag and use an 11-bit number space, instead of
> overloading the 0x0000 version. That would have eliminated the
> need for a lot of special-casing in the arithmetic.

Yes, this could have been an option.


> 
> ### Inclusive language
> 
> Found terminology that should be reviewed for inclusivity; see
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/part2/#inclusive_language for background and more
> guidance:
> 
> * Term `invalid`; alternatives might be `not valid`, `unenforceable`, `not
>   binding`, `inoperative`, `illegitimate`, `incorrect`, `improper`,
>   `unacceptable`, `inapplicable`, `revoked`, `rescinded`
> 

Absolutely. We will fix the language, thanks.


Ciao

L.




> ## Nits
> 
> All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
> address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
> automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there
> will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
> did with these suggestions.
> 
> ### Boilerplate
> 
> Document still refers to the "Simplified BSD License", which was corrected in
> the TLP on September 21, 2021. It should instead refer to the "Revised BSD
> License".
> 
> ### Grammar/style
> 
> #### Section 6.1, paragraph 5
> ```
> C Map-Cache for the source EID is up to date. If one or both of the above pre
>                                  ^^^^^^^^^^
> ```
> It appears that hyphens are missing in the adjective "up-to-date".
> 
> #### "A.1.", paragraph 2
> ```
> LISP Domain A is able to check whether or not the PITR is using the latest m
>                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> ```
> Consider shortening this phrase to just "whether". It is correct though if you
> mean "regardless of whether".
> 
> #### "A.2.1.", paragraph 2
> ```
> the Proxy-ETR is able to check whether or not the mapping has changed. A.3.
>                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> ```
> Consider shortening this phrase to just "whether". It is correct though if you
> mean "regardless of whether".
> 
> ## Notes
> 
> This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
> [`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
> individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT].
> 
> [ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
> [ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
> [IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool
> 
> 
>