Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-04: (with COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Fri, 21 December 2018 00:26 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
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 748251312AB; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 16:26:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 4ejn94NuXPi8; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 16:26:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-6.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-6.mit.edu [18.7.68.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3547130EBC; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 16:26:50 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 12074423-8c3ff700000053bc-d2-5c1c33478171
Received: from mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.43]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-6.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id C2.C4.21436.8433C1C5; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 19:26:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.9.2) with ESMTP id wBL0Ql0I004269; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 19:26:47 -0500
Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id wBL0Qi18014602 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 20 Dec 2018 19:26:46 -0500
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 18:26:43 -0600
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis@ietf.org>, "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <ketant@cisco.com>, "aretana.ietf@gmail.com" <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, "lsr-chairs@ietf.org" <lsr-chairs@ietf.org>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20181221002643.GN94620@kduck.kaduk.org>
References: <154527688937.2072.12996887319475512262.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5d87307e8c394db2b2873422a53ae8af@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5d87307e8c394db2b2873422a53ae8af@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpnleLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IR4hTV1vUwlokxuPFJxeLGoQ1MFq+PWVls +LOR3WLGn4nMFg/3PmCxWH/1JIvFiScrWB3YPab83sjqsXPWXXaPJUt+MgUwR3HZpKTmZJal FunbJXBl3HlSVHBFvOLO5V8sDYzThbsYOTkkBEwkvsz4wdLFyMUhJLCGSeLD5nfsEM5GRokX a2awQTh3mCTm7H/DDNLCIqAqcfPFNiYQm01ARaKh+zJQnINDRMBIYvFzbZB6ZoGzTBLLl3Qw gtQICyRK7HgxCczmBVq36NghqHUdjBJ3b19nhkgISpyc+YQFxGYW0JK48e8lE8hQZgFpieX/ OEDCnAKuEk0zPoCFRYH2fl4gMIFRYBaS5llImmchNC9gZF7FKJuSW6Wbm5iZU5yarFucnJiX l1qka6aXm1mil5pSuokRFN7sLso7GF/2eR9iFOBgVOLh1dglHSPEmlhWXJl7iFGSg0lJlPeV rEyMEF9SfkplRmJxRnxRaU5q8SFGCQ5mJRHeUhagHG9KYmVValE+TEqag0VJnPePyONoIYH0 xJLU7NTUgtQimKwMB4eSBK+sEVCjYFFqempFWmZOCUKaiYMTZDgP0PA/hiDDiwsSc4sz0yHy pxgVpcR5pUCaBUASGaV5cL2g9CORvb/mFaM40CvCvIk6QFU8wNQF1/0KaDAT0OCcLUwgg0sS EVJSDYw17Ap+E8+11PwQqYpN14n2Y1nrUrL49jP+dJ8Zm8TfXheTZ1/Lduv5a5mbxmZmPmdk +s5x7khkveDRwyOYbPo/JmPbLW7pJwHhWz4Gi6Uv6394uOnAmVdM37uvLIyWlw6xWtT5Kjmt /OrSvR23zz8X2Slw9LJOCs+TWfV6udk+DybcfHh8p6cSS3FGoqEWc1FxIgBi82gUGgMAAA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/mQxt1Sab49iW4gsm_i27hB3q1Mw>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-04: (with COMMENT)
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: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 00:26:57 -0000

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 04:42:13AM +0000, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote:
> Benjamin -
> 
> Inline.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>;
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 7:35 PM
> > To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>;
> > Cc: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis@ietf.org; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
> > <ketant@cisco.com>;; aretana.ietf@gmail.com; lsr-chairs@ietf.org; Ketan
> > Talaulikar (ketant) <ketant@cisco.com>;; lsr@ietf.org
> > Subject: Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-04:
> > (with COMMENT)
> > 
> > Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-04: 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-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > The nice tidy diff against RFC 7810 and description in Appendix A made this
> > document very easy to review; thank you!
> > 
> 
> [Les:] Thanx.
> 
> > That said, I think that there are some lingering factual errors that will
> > require some text changes; in particular, relating to the IANA
> > registrations.  E.g,. Section 2 shouldn't say "this document registers new
> > IS-IS TE sub-TLVs" and "this document registers several sub-TLVs", since
> > the sub-TLVs are not new.  Similarly, one could make a case that the IANA
> > considerations should request for IANA to update the registrations for the
> > indicated sub-TLVs to point to this document instead of RFC 7810.
> > 
> 
> [Les:] I think we are discussing small matters here - though I appreciate your desire for diligence.
> I would argue that once this document is published no one should have to read RFC 7810 ever again (unless you are a history buff). Which means it really then does become "this document" which introduces the new sub-TLVs.
> So using language which requires the existence of the obsoleted document seems wrong to me.

Re-reading, I see I wrote this in a bit of haste.  Of the actual text I
quoted, I would suggest only removing the word "new"...

> Regarding the IANA registry, there has already been an email exchange with the IANA folks and the registry will be updated to point to this document.

... and am happy to hear this is already in progress.  (My travel schedule
did not allow me to keep up on all the other email traffic for this
document prior to the telechat, so I had missed it.)

-Benjamin