Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "Flexible Algorithms: Bandwidth, Delay, Metrics and Constraints" - draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-07

I support publication of this draft.

This is important piece of the flex-algo work. And, there are at least two interoppearble implementations.

Thanks,
Krzysztof

> From: Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@gmail.com <mailto:acee.lindem@gmail.com>> 
> Sent: Friday, March 1, 2024 4:16 AM
> To: Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@gmail.com <mailto:acee.lindem@gmail.com>>
> Cc: lsr <lsr@ietf.org <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>; draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con@ietf.org <mailto:draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "Flexible Algorithms: Bandwidth, Delay, Metrics and Constraints" - draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-07
>  
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
> 
> 
> Authors,
> 
> I support publication of this document but not in its current state. I have the following comments that should be resolved first:
> 
>     1. "Backward Compatibility" section is missing. This should be straightforward given that an FAD computation only includes
>         nodes supporting that FAD.
>      2. “Security Considerations” is “TBD”.
>      3. There is no “Operational Considerations” section. Someone may ask for one.
>      4. The document alludes to the problem with elephant flows. Yet for “Interface Group Mode”, the aggregate bandwidth for multiple L3 links is used. How would this work when a flow is typically bound to a single L3 interface?
>      5. #3 in section 5 is very hard to parse. Possibly split into multiple coherent sentences.
> 
> Lots of editorial nits - I’m attaching some suggested edits but I’m not sure I got them all.
> 
>       1. Use “sub-TLV” and “Sub-TLV” consistent with the usage in RFC  9350. I tried to fix these on the fly but it probably still needs work. Basically, it is capitalized when used as part of a proper noun identifying a specific sub-TLV. Also, in section titles and captions.
>       2. Reference RFC9350 rather than the Flex-Algo draft throughout.
>       3. I didn’t make the change but I’d use “Layer-2” and “Layer-3” hyphenated.
> 
> See attached editorial suggestions  in the RFC diff.
> 
> Thanks,
> Acee
> 
> 
> > On Feb 19, 2024, at 5:25 PM, Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@gmail.com <mailto:acee.lindem@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > This starts the Working Group Last call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-07. At least some of the flex algorithm enhancements described in the document have been implemented. 
> > 
> > Please send your support or objection to this before March 5th, 2024. 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Acee
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lsr mailing list
> > Lsr@ietf.org <mailto:Lsr@ietf.org>
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!Cv33O23fKbqI5Mibov464lpU2T_xjsvN8M9FRLg5sfwFuc-uvt8zz70GyAVhzS-6Tzg8QoA1XXKadGgo4se8DQ$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!Cv33O23fKbqI5Mibov464lpU2T_xjsvN8M9FRLg5sfwFuc-uvt8zz70GyAVhzS-6Tzg8QoA1XXKadGgo4se8DQ$>

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "Flexible Algorithms: Bandwidth, Delay, Metrics and Constraints" - draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-07

Attachment: draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-07-orig.diff.html