Re: [Lsr] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-11

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Tue, 19 May 2020 13:26 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 898E73A0408; Tue, 19 May 2020 06:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=c4SheYpN; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Iufxn13V
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 u0SvvRG34a_E; Tue, 19 May 2020 06:26:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 467773A040C; Tue, 19 May 2020 06:26:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A8075C009A; Tue, 19 May 2020 09:26:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 19 May 2020 09:26:01 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= from:message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; s=fm3; bh=Z16iU5QVSbfiMKXc/7sdpI2 RtTzXD9aLon80SFgrvr8=; b=c4SheYpNFP/IUjJa1p5JIsmccQA28vVLIxaDdel AhKqln/cydxpqhgGcQuhBFGtcSSDOi0cXQu9bi3cw9umQa9Ulj9Dbbu/efSTXK1Z qayzWLvtCdAMAxRvfbSeN2vA7FDUKscCXjuQVS30Rm+yeopyWBjrHouuvk0AQbr6 fnOixGJzbnR/46MVz7SM+PEPzCnwDGMOMabLJRTbKbup9ddatlmTKtWI+Fw4bcW8 lOH/ZF1jcFG7M+dpb4WgDGypHn4lASG+9CXuSz4Bl3Y3hm/uVoHGY+b7FLBNZawr eRsLDSV5YqsN0OYEmheF3t40eu81twP4CQ4wtOrd44qVAbg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Z16iU5 QVSbfiMKXc/7sdpI2RtTzXD9aLon80SFgrvr8=; b=Iufxn13VrPvOYqPJPc8sB/ pAqE6gqB3A3fy6R2DPE+zJ7lIlD5HARRl2ue+qnpZmQ11WCMWJA3djIBTo/1zfBL wLD4IfHrYRsglzVt0jey+SN+MjcxAAvA+Xa2F/a2l0Hav+a+7pNMy/MhM99oLX1f EZ6SJyC717OvwKcFoo/CKE5qKZEtlUZJe66kfagmbdq6+dVzdUGlzT/XzrseVTqd OCXcmb25JaDrkvzEIBYF6SNU0qT0A7xNzsjGMXOSxRtWAyu3CaJAlaCeMxuEQWnK 9qt1QQ6797MPe+vP1WuVSZZiYV2by18G0chbXcY8pzwzD5mP6hYVzAGWXSCvNnPA ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:aN7DXqy99z1XcsP783vtryMX5cchBS0JvLnZbnD2N3Piz4E3N2Q9fQ>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedruddtjedgieegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffktgggufffjgfvfhfosegrtdhmrehhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeetlhhishhs rgcuvehoohhpvghruceorghlihhsshgrsegtohhophgvrhifrdhinheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepgeegffefuddvffeflefgheektdeigfehffdtteetieeffefhfedugeduuedv vefhnecuffhomhgrihhnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepudejfedrfeekrdduudejrd ektdenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegr lhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhn
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:aN7DXmRmakG8-zkMyP1xyAMWt0VEkAvzfRF1JRATLHxcTuQE7q3pVA> <xmx:aN7DXsXI24WGQuAZUpORMyOejTSvb_Rd5I7b8gBMkaAkt5KgEXvnCQ> <xmx:aN7DXgjmdKWgYYsj1F4rSMSoq0fU1rGQf1dxGB7qgZuXcK6qCFvDNA> <xmx:ad7DXvPq7oPFEAr_Wf2FN2QEbVMW7MWETq0aEzJAR0UKeT-DH43ZRg>
Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro2.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.80]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7CBB7328005A; Tue, 19 May 2020 09:26:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
Message-Id: <C8157E95-7D0A-4BA7-927D-58DDFD6E01C9@cooperw.in>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4C3BCE30-CDDD-47D3-B46E-B8C3665EE81A"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.5\))
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 09:25:59 -0400
In-Reply-To: <08CE25A6-F1BF-49BF-8DF1-B947096F562F@cisco.com>
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc.all@ietf.org>, "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Mohit Sethi M <mohit.m.sethi@ericsson.com>
References: <158771396796.16808.7505639544953079846@ietfa.amsl.com> <E17FABFB-FF20-4BB0-8A2A-214A4E5DE04E@cisco.com> <db960001-7069-53da-d494-f7b12566756c@ericsson.com> <08CE25A6-F1BF-49BF-8DF1-B947096F562F@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.5)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/35gVvXJn65Qc5hf-q7Q8hueoPOs>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-11
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 19 May 2020 13:26:08 -0000

Mohit, thanks for your review. Acee, thanks for your responses. I entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa


> On Apr 29, 2020, at 7:26 AM, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Mohit, 
>  
> From: Mohit Sethi M <mohit.m.sethi@ericsson.com <mailto:mohit.m.sethi@ericsson.com>>
> Date: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 2:29 AM
> To: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com <mailto:acee@cisco.com>>, "gen-art@ietf.org <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>" <gen-art@ietf.org <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>>
> Cc: "lsr@ietf.org <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>" <lsr@ietf.org <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>, "draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc.all@ietf.org <mailto:draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc.all@ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc.all@ietf.org <mailto:draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc.all@ietf.org>>, "last-call@ietf.org <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>" <last-call@ietf.org <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>>
> Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-11
>  
> HI Acee,
> 
> On 4/24/20 3:38 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
>> Hi Mohit,
>>  
>> Speaking as document shepherd. See inline. 
>>  
>> On 4/24/20, 3:39 AM, "Mohit Sethi via Datatracker" <noreply@ietf.org> <mailto:noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>>  
>>     Reviewer: Mohit Sethi
>>     Review result: Ready with Nits
>>  
>>     I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>>     Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>>     by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>>     like any other last call comments.
>>  
>>     For more information, please see the FAQ at
>>  
>>     <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>>  
>>     Document: draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-11
>>     Reviewer: Mohit Sethi
>>     Review Date: 2020-04-24
>>     IETF LC End Date: 2020-05-05
>>     IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>>  
>>     Summary: This document specifies how Entropy Label Capability (ELC) and Entropy
>>     Readable Label Depth (ERLD) are advertised using IS-IS. For advertising ELC, a
>>     flag in the Prefix Attribute Flags is used. For advertising ERLD, a Node MSD
>>     Advertisement is used.
>>  
>>     Major issues:
>>  
>>     Minor issues: The document is short and straightforward. For someone like me
>>     who is not familiar with the routing area, would it make sense to explain why
>>     signalling ELC information with MPLS is not sufficient (or what are the
>>     benefits of advertising with IS-IS)?
>>  
>> I guess I'm wondering what you mean "signaling ELC information with MPLS"? With segment routing, the IGPs can be the only choice for signaling ELC capability. I don’t believe this comment requires any action. 
> I hope that you don't expect a gen-art reviewer to be an expert on every topic. I certainly am NOT on expert on routing. I interpreted the following text in the draft:
> 
>> It also
>>    introduces the concept of Entropy Label Capability (ELC) and defines
>>    the signaling of this capability via MPLS signaling protocols.
> to imply that signaling ELC information with MPLS is possible but this draft defines a mechanism for signaling the same information with IS-IS. Maybe the need for this is very obvious for those in the routing domain in which case ignoring my comment is perfectly fine. 
>  
> Even though you are not an expert on routing, you should realize that “with MPLS” and “via MPLS signaling protocols” have very different connotations. If you reference section 3 of the reference document [RFC6790], you’ll the MPLS signaling protocols currently supporting ELC signaling. As I stated previously, with segment routing none of these protocols are required for deployment.
>  
> Thanks,
> Acee
> --Mohit
> 
>>  
>> Thanks,
>> Acee
>>  
>>  
>>     Nits/editorial comments:
>>  
>>     In section 3, "used as the ECL  Flag" should perhaps be "used as the ELC Flag"?
>>     In section 4, "IANA for EARLD-MSD" should perhaps be "IANA for ERLD-MSD"?
>>     In section 6, "ECL Flag (E-flag)." should perhaps be "ELC Flag (E-flag)."?
>>  
>>  
>>  
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org <mailto:Gen-art@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>