IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Review of draft-rosen-mpls-rfc3107bis

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Thu, 18 August 2016 18:00 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72BF312DB28; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:00:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.768
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.768 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 syKHAKytRbSF; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCA4D12D733; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 10:58:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1922; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1471543123; x=1472752723; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=w+AvgIJ8qoPRv7deG37E/wPlfB52uN7Cj6WSqpR7I3k=; b=OkSkFtNSNUYZAyA+AHWhxKEbDWoia7c2/6B2XUIyXNBxBa2YChf1UG9r ik7c7U2GT2v0rcmCPqedLxEFi8N2YbCZT3lBF3S3TOPAKoi+i7OMIhHZ2 qvxKjqBzGbhG8nXdatPf2HH6OMKZ0zNUa+dGztPviOTvfp7Yw0Ls7uZ2L k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BeAgCM9rVX/4sNJK1dg0NWfAe3YYF9JIV5AhyBUjgUAgEBAQEBAQFeJ4ReAQEEAQEBIRE6BAcFCwIBCBgCAiYCAgIlCxUQAgQOBYgpCA6sNZAXAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFwWBAYchglWEQIMBK4IvBYYPkzUBjBeDBo9JjDuDdwEeNoISHIFMboYufwEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,541,1464652800"; d="scan'208";a="310684530"
Received: from alln-core-6.cisco.com ([173.36.13.139]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 18 Aug 2016 17:58:43 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (xch-rtp-014.cisco.com [64.101.220.154]) by alln-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u7IHwgQv019207 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:58:43 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (64.101.220.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 13:58:42 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 13:58:41 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Eric C Rosen <erosen@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Review of draft-rosen-mpls-rfc3107bis
Thread-Index: AQHR7WRPcBmXEtDAfkqSOeRVtmV0BKBNqQwAgAGzh4A=
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:58:41 +0000
Message-ID: <F87AE58F-A94B-47C5-A815-5925BF26EB5E@cisco.com>
References: <041801d1ecdb$317d1910$94774b30$@olddog.co.uk> <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE28E782AA6@SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com> <5d7fcd92-f663-50fc-4057-9827746886ca@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <5d7fcd92-f663-50fc-4057-9827746886ca@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.201]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <0D5D9A16669C534FBD41E52ABDCF24DA@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/5lDS8VJs3UKKfQn77Vqx3CC6yXs>
Cc: "draft-rosen-mpls-rfc3107bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-rosen-mpls-rfc3107bis.all@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Review of draft-rosen-mpls-rfc3107bis
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 18:00:28 -0000

Hi Eric, Mach, 

> On Aug 17, 2016, at 11:59 AM, Eric C Rosen <erosen@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Mach,
> 
> Thanks for your review.
> 
> On 8/3/2016 4:51 AM, Mach Chen wrote:
>> I have only one comment regarding to Section 5. IMHO, although it's informational, the description about the relationship between SAFI-1 and SAFI-4 routes should not belong to this document, it's a more common description that is not specific to this label binding process. I'd suggest to remove this section if there is no any other reasons.
> 
> Differing interpretations about the relationship between SAFI-1 and SAFI-4 are a very common source of interoperability problems among implementations of different vendors.  Thus I think it is very useful to document this issue and to call attention to some of the differing interpretations.  I think this document is an appropriate place for this information; even though this information is not about label binding, it is about the semantics of SAFI-4.

I agree with Eric. Even though RFC 3107 was an MPLS WG document, I think the document would fit better in IDR. Having said that, I don’t want to start a protracted debate since we probably have enough cross-WG participation ;^) 

Thanks,
Acee 


> 
> Eric
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email