Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 Shepherd review
Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Mon, 09 July 2018 14:13 UTC
Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
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 79D1612D949;
Mon, 9 Jul 2018 07:13:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]
autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 Ts-as9z79YJG; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 07:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141])
(using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54172128CF3;
Mon, 9 Jul 2018 07:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.5] (c83-250-142-104.bredband.comhem.se
[83.250.142.104])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu)
by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E3321801510;
Mon, 9 Jul 2018 16:13:07 +0200 (CEST)
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>,
"Peter Psenak (ppsenak)" <ppsenak@cisco.com>,
Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>,
"draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id@ietf.org"
<draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id@ietf.org>,
"lsr-chairs@ietf.org" <lsr-chairs@ietf.org>
Cc: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
References: <6FD38147-EA21-4336-B436-1072BF449DE2@huawei.com>
<5B43276F.2040405@cisco.com> <8A3E4F27-F540-424E-8617-2C986FD3DA00@cisco.com>
<5B43545B.7070403@cisco.com> <13338F6E-0DFD-4D80-8719-1947514933B9@cisco.com>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <aaa8719c-00d3-3b50-86da-093fe334af31@pi.nu>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 16:13:07 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <13338F6E-0DFD-4D80-8719-1947514933B9@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/1oKunKt_FesZNvEwO6GhXSikKdU>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 Shepherd review
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: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 14:13:13 -0000
Folks, I agree - no reason to delay! There is one small difference between what is in the document and what is in the RFC I pointed to The document has "...as described in [BCP 14] [RFC2119] [RFC8174]..." While RFC has "...as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174]..." The reference list in the RFC do not have BCP 14 listed as a reference. I don't know if this helps. Acee BCP 14 is both [RFC2119] and [RFC8174]. /Loa On 2018-07-09 14:29, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Strange, I'd remove the reference to [BCP14] since RFC 8174 and BCP 14 are the same document. I'm going to request publication as this certainly isn't enough to delay for an update. > > Thanks, > Acee > > On 7/9/18, 8:26 AM, "Peter Psenak (ppsenak)" <ppsenak@cisco.com> wrote: > > Hi Acee, > > that is exactly what I have in the draft. > > thanks, > Peter > > On 09/07/18 13:36 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > Hi Peter, > > > > The new boiler plate for requirements language, with references to both RFC 2119 and RFC 8174, is: > > > > > > 1.1. Requirements Language > > > > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", > > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and > > "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP > > 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all > > capitals, as shown here. > > > > > > This should resolve the IDNITS warning. > > > > Thanks, > > Acee > > > > On 7/9/18, 5:14 AM, "Peter Psenak (ppsenak)" <ppsenak@cisco.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Yingzhen, > > > > thanks for your review. > > > > As regards to first IDNITS warning, not sure about the first one, I took > > the section "Requirements Language" from RFC8395 as suggested by Loa. > > RFC2119 is only referenced there, that should not be a problem though. > > > > I removed the reference to ISO10589. > > > > thanks, > > Peter > > > > On 09/07/18 00:41 , Yingzhen Qu wrote: > > > Dear authors, > > > > > > I have done shepherd review of draft-ietf-ospf-lls-id-04 as requested by > > > LSR chairs. I’d like to thank all authors for their contributions on > > > this document, also people who have reviewed this document and provided > > > valuable comments and discussions. > > > > > > The document is well written and ready for publication. > > > > > > IDNITS check found a couple of nits: > > > > > > Miscellaneous warnings: > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ** The document contains RFC2119-like boilerplate, but doesn't seem to > > > > > > mention RFC 2119. The boilerplate contains a reference [BCP14], > > > but that > > > > > > reference does not seem to mention RFC 2119 either. > > > > > > -- The document date (July 1, 2018) is 7 days in the past. Is this > > > > > > intentional? > > > > > > Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative > > > references > > > > > > to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) > > > > > > == Unused Reference: 'ISO10589' is defined on line 200, but no explicit > > > > > > reference was found in the text > > > > > > '[ISO10589] International Organization for Standardization, > > > "Intermed...' > > > > > > -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'BCP14' > > > > > > -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'ISO10589' > > > > > > Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 3 comments (--). > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Yingzhen > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Lsr mailing list > Lsr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr > -- Loa Andersson email: loa@pi.nu Senior MPLS Expert Bronze Dragon Consulting phone: +46 739 81 21 64
- Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 She… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 She… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 She… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 She… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 She… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 She… Loa Andersson
- [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 Shepher… Yingzhen Qu
- Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-04 She… Peter Psenak