[Lsr] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-15: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Sun, 23 September 2018 23:51 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F24D1200D7; Sun, 23 Sep 2018 16:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org, Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, lsr-chairs@ietf.org, chopps@chopps.org, lsr@ietf.org, wangzitao@huawei.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.84.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <153774669744.29272.15657588887368208840.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2018 16:51:37 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/Xx9D-JRiU7JxgYawWD7V2IDo3H8>
Subject: [Lsr] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-15: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 23 Sep 2018 23:51:38 -0000

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-15: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for a well written, clear and easy to understand document.
Also thanks to Zitao Wang for the OpsDir review (
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/GT5r_8_OukxlqMb1NFdsbNysJIw )

While reviewing it I found some minor nits - these are not blocking comments,
but please consider addressing them to make the document even better:

1: Section 1:
" Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) SR extensions"
I think this would read better as "The Path Computation ..." (Hey! I did say
they were nits :-))

2: Section 2.  Node MSD Advertisement
"Type: 23 (allocated by IANA via the early assignment process)"
Comment:  Thank you for mentioning here that this is an early allocation - it
makes it much easier on the reviewer than flipping to the back of the document
to check, flipping forward, etc.!

3: Section 3.  Link MSD Advertisement
"MSD values may be learned via a hardware API or may be provisioned."
I don't quite get what a "hardware API" is -- perhaps "an API which talks
directly to the hardware"? Or just drop API (or hardware)?

4: Section 6.  IANA Considerations
"Per TLV information where Link MSD sub-TLV can be part of:
   TLV  22 23 25 141 222 223
   ---  --------------------
yyyyyy
        Figure 5: TLVs where LINK MSD Sub-TLV can be present"

I understand what this is trying to say, but I don't think it does a very good
job of doing so. Perhaps remove the figure and just say "The LINK MSD Sub-TLV
can be in TLVs 22, 23, 25,141, 222 or 223" or similar....