IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-05

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Fri, 17 August 2018 01:11 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 318DB130F49; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 18:11:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.509
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.509 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, 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 Vypv_6VNgYNd; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 18:11:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C13AD130E1B; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 18:11:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=16612; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1534468301; x=1535677901; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=I44K4OkqbhaZjtKDB6qf+K/nO5aBOsiDnyJza/YJUf8=; b=iPTXtezsKlvZ2dobRO3Nknb7hpaWH/5MzZlZ9EGue6imgG0upsDuMSQO np1JYoQTWh8SPTltuTgJ4+Ct79hKLUupCa/bvGnfQNNRFlI8obKo9sbN7 DzwC8rbA4Q95KoyiklRljDaR6mu/8D6q8YAYg0BGfuEda6gaUqF5hB4Tk o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0C0AADaH3Zb/4sNJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYJXeGN/KAqDZYgKjB6BaCWQa4UrFIFmC4RsAheDLSE0GAECAQECAQECbSiFNwEBAQQjTwcQAgEIEQMBAisCAgIwHQgCBAENBYMiAYEdZKkDgS6KZokYF4IAgTkME4JMhEZYgmExgiYCiHGEAYVIiDMJAo9ZDwaBOoQuiEaIK4pPAhEUgSQdOIFScBUaSwGCPgmQSm+Mc4EbAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.53,249,1531785600"; d="scan'208,217";a="157990917"
Received: from alln-core-6.cisco.com ([173.36.13.139]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Aug 2018 01:11:40 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (xch-rtp-013.cisco.com [64.101.220.153]) by alln-core-6.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w7H1BeF6019024 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 17 Aug 2018 01:11:40 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 21:11:39 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 21:11:39 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Padmadevi Pillay Esnault <padma@huawei.com>, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>, "draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit@ietf.org>
CC: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Lsr] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-05
Thread-Index: AQHUNcdA58LFC0I610yvCTK1M/uaAA==
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 01:11:39 +0000
Message-ID: <E5152CE3-2732-43C5-934E-2DDCB2CEAA3F@cisco.com>
References: <26B79163-D044-418D-9081-AC4313BFBC2D@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <26B79163-D044-418D-9081-AC4313BFBC2D@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.204]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E5152CE3273243C5934E2DDCB2CEAA3Fciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 64.101.220.153, xch-rtp-013.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-6.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/04FFTvaalkVe-u0zbYb-ouOtEio>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-05
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 01:11:46 -0000

Hi Padma,
The WG last call has completed. Please republish the draft with the changes.
Thanks,
Acee

From: Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Padmadevi Pillay Esnault <padma@huawei.com>
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 7:05 PM
To: Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>, "draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit@ietf.org>
Cc: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>, Padmadevi Pillay Esnault <padma@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-05

Yingzhen

Thank you for your comment.
Will respin the draft to address them.

Padma

From: Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>
Date: Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 3:17 PM
To: "draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit@ietf.org>
Cc: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: [Lsr] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-05

Dear authors,

I’m assigned to do the shepherd review for draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-05.

The following question needs to be answered in the review:

(16) Will publication of this document change the status of any existing
     RFCs?  Are those RFCs listed on the title page header, listed in
     the abstract, and discussed in the introduction? If the RFCs are
     not listed in the Abstract and Introduction, explain why, and point
     to the part of the document where the relationship of this document
     to the other RFCs is discussed. If this information is not in the
     document, explain why the WG considers it unnecessary.

draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-05 does change RFC 2328, and this needs to be added in the title pager header, the abstract, and introduction. So please do an update version of the draft to include the required changes.

Also, please fix the nits in the abstract: “however it will not used as a transit router.”.

Thanks,
Yingzhen

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email