[Lsr] WGLC: draft-ietf-bier-bar-ipa

Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com> Wed, 07 August 2019 20:16 UTC

Return-Path: <gjshep@gmail.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 8599F120152; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 FYQArowv9_nL; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:16:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x336.google.com (mail-ot1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::336]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAF2512011E; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:16:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x336.google.com with SMTP id q20so109329703otl.0; Wed, 07 Aug 2019 13:16:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5WjOMu6M3vWnvGbCG9vYQLgxJHpUYGribopC7CsU0sk=; b=W2Y3rzXCE8Wgo3SZGwqqidhpCmE3ZD6eeAZ6Xsz1MjUgq0JdvZV15nTJaLKdsKLL+7 hLyIX0IfsYYGEjlbJ3dKq8Sx6nJYYUJFOhztmXLK98/ZfykEG6YBx4ElHlnaMzbiblbE fMqI4TvLqQzLrG4mupNC8pMsB/DDGMhhi348Ms2UqOqh/3nsGC+BopH5qZNQbkPJult9 +E8voFEDdwVyvgHSw1mIgheVSACHyRoJvqktbPoQ+RjG2w5Wgv+03gKw0uQbHVUy5EAd Ku8ozDSycffKEw4c4fJoIM5Fd8efYmPeSYpwwh9jVddd10FiKEO1KKB0jNI7b/njurRR 7Ywg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=5WjOMu6M3vWnvGbCG9vYQLgxJHpUYGribopC7CsU0sk=; b=tdVZkJK0s+hDO0MxzxDJiznI0eK5gWtJBzNnFVW8Kzky1mgmtZ3+wCnhk1DN2buPBs wavdz0xvADOinprgLkUecOu4fjFz1yXSyur0/5EFd/qqiPRfE3Ibyeqn3k6g+cMk844q A89HkrWAavetfqIt1S620nYGGEcevwjYNn4/3CDlwK00D59OK1ZSnPSgFOjy3OGzSUCl pA4SPvAMNXcY8109WFDERoqRl5Va0Rh7bctRRsOhJUXcHpGTLKa2On5FeRfjTI0qDuoR oXyZIAFsq8YOptAxI8CrrJWVzZ+bAhRnSJhJFQ/fjg8VU+JMEmUtkohhIeEXIlKlkSiB HNgw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU05wAbSpVYEIMbW7r41R523faXIsb6TDJPK+RzYu6t131W4OZS 6yWSQvlfL+yS+KsjZEzV5ceirJMFjcr4Mxj0E7OoFyId
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyFTIAfSv03KsyxhSdUry3CTp1NltXx4oRlkQPvW0439fsT6c4ECgO61WCKl2IWOwXIH7wyfCukbbANzaDXWA0=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:f008:: with SMTP id w8mr6142957ioc.60.1565209015454; Wed, 07 Aug 2019 13:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: gjshep@gmail.com
From: Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:16:44 -0700
Message-ID: <CABFReBpw2Pi6-0uDn6SmZO8WxSBH4yyBaW7tL1p1iXfe9kjHLQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>, Xiejingrong <xiejingrong@huawei.com>, bier-ads@ietf.org
Cc: lsr@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005d8fae058f8c9f04"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/bDHW-e61FmFWrgl1UxeAopUe4r0>
Subject: [Lsr] WGLC: draft-ietf-bier-bar-ipa
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: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 20:16:59 -0000

cc:ing lsr for input before progress. We have good overlap, but too be
sure, the list.

The draft cleared WGLC:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bier-bar-ipa-04

In discussion of next steps, the following comments were made by Alvaro
which need to be addressed:

<alvaro>
- In general, idnits and the IESG likes it very much when the specific
phrase “this document updates rfcxxx by…” appears in the Abstract and the
Introduction.  There’s some similar text there, but not exactly.   Just a
nit.

- There are no Security Considerations!!

- Use the rfc8174 template!

- "all routers SHOULD be provisioned with and signal the same BAR and IPA
values”. When would you not do that?  Why is that not a MUST?

- “...MUST treat the advertising BFR as incapable of supporting BIER for
the sub-domain.  How incapable routers are handled is outside the scope of
this document.”  That is a Normative contradiction?  How are routers
supposed to meet the MUST if they don’t know what to do?

- s/MUST also be clear/MUST also be specified
</alvaro>

Authors, please address these comments. Xiejingrong has volunteered to be
Document Shepherd, once cleared.

Thank you,
Shep
(chairs)