Re: [lmap] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lmap-framework-05.txt

Greg,
thanks for the reading!

must vs MUST
initial LMAP work vs for future study

suggest leave both of these issues for the AD /IESG / RFC editor to see what they prefer.

configuration - thanks for spotting, sorry this is my error. it should be something that the Control protocol does.

definition of active measurement method & task. perhaps this could be honed. would like to understand your comment about "coordination is optional" a bit better.
 an active measurement task involves the MA measuring traffic that's been sent by (*) another MA, or a measurement peer. (*) or received from.  there needs to be some kind of coordination to arrange for this traffic to be sent. is the problem that the current words could be read to imply that the coordination must be directly between the MAs, whereas it could be that the controller sends a task/schedule instruction to one MA and a report instruction to another MA (as in example A3 in the appendix)?

thanks
phil

________________________________________
From: lmap [lmap-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Greg Mirsky [gregimirsky@gmail.com]
Sent: 16 May 2014 01:16
To: lmap@ietf.org; draft-ietf-lmap-framework@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [lmap] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lmap-framework-05.txt

Dear Authors, et. al,
please find my comments to the latest updates of the LMAP Framework document below:

 *   Use of RFC 2119. Even though the Framework document is on Informational track RFC 2119 may be used. Hence my question: Do we want to turn 'must' into MUST and so on in the document?
 *   Section 3. I think that definition of an Active Measurement Method only as "A generalization of an Active Measurement Task" is not sufficiently clear. Perhaps the following may be used instead by re-using or referring to explanation of Measurement Method:

Active Measurement Method - The process of measuring some performance or reliability parameter associated with the transfer of Traffic by generating and/or receiving Active Measurement Traffic.

 *   If definition of the Active Measurement Method references use of Active Measurement Traffic, then the current definition can be updated to explain that Active Measurement Task is realization of Active Measurement Method among participating Measurement Agents and Measurement Peers with specific parameters, e.g. profile of the Active Measurement Traffic.

And I believe that coordination of Active Measurement Task among participating MAs and/or MPs is optional. The current definition reads as it is mandatory. I suggest to change it by splitting the sentence and making it to say "Coordination of an Active Measurement Task among participating Measurement Agents and/or Measurement Peers may be achieved by using protocols. Definition of such protocols by LMAP WG is for further study."

 *   I don't see much difference between Configuration Protocol and Control Protocol. I think that the former supports subset of functionality of the latter. Besides, it is not clear whether Configuration Protocol uses Control Channel between Controller and a MA or not. I think this differentiation between Configuration and Control is unnecessary.
 *   Reference to "initial LMAP work" may be too vague as charter of the LMAP WG will likely to change with time. Can it be changed to "NNN is for future study"?
 *   Section 5.2 been introduced in this version. Firstly, I don't recall that the WG discussed Configuration Protocol and agreed that it is essential part of the LMAP Framework. Adding new concepts, IMO, doesn't help to pass WG LC.

Regards,
Greg

On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:21 AM, <internet-drafts@ietf.org<mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>> wrote:

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Large-Scale Measurement of Broadband Performance Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : A framework for large-scale measurement platforms (LMAP)
        Authors         : Philip Eardley
                          Al Morton
                          Marcelo Bagnulo
                          Trevor Burbridge
                          Paul Aitken
                          Aamer Akhter
        Filename        : draft-ietf-lmap-framework-05.txt
        Pages           : 54
        Date            : 2014-05-13

Abstract:
   Measuring broadband service on a large scale requires a description
   of the logical architecture and standardisation of the key protocols
   that coordinate interactions between the components.  The document
   presents an overall framework for large-scale measurements.  It also
   defines terminology for LMAP (large-scale measurement platforms).

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lmap-framework/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lmap-framework-05

A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-lmap-framework-05

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org<http://tools.ietf.org>.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

_______________________________________________
lmap mailing list
lmap@ietf.org<mailto:lmap@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lmap