IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] review: draft-ietf-mpls-extended-admin-group-05

Eric Osborne <eric@notcom.com> Fri, 25 April 2014 14:07 UTC

Return-Path: <eric@notcom.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D10D1A0515 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 07:07:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=unavailable
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 pzPyXPENqmbR for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 07:07:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yh0-f54.google.com (mail-yh0-f54.google.com [209.85.213.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E33B31A04F1 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 07:07:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yh0-f54.google.com with SMTP id b6so780398yha.41 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 07:06:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=C6UuSJmF37b36gipDz5dbOmpcAsyfjFXoDSCAyuY34I=; b=WkOFhVotFJOeePQchzDK/0+iP0Ify7zz8NOsd9uAPdeeD8doqgPDdLDjezAJJat6ys 4JihR7lcbfVs+SSC/eCh5EpdFWmGI1tpQzA15ACF+BjWqvaMDFkeA4dDfQzkc/ai+nn+ A9gdeqmYlz7b9zoPM0GFZTlXxtLX0yadvQdu/WZ5SS7/VircfiUiqFx6RFAVUrE2XgCI WmTwZA34rVqAGNTqs20DNt0kO6wmVKdXgnM4Kmet5tOV1vZj4kiju941PXo2MMpqK8qw 18IX/asjzOrsUQKTtdSawLkTsU6D5zWfUJWls/qw6w6oJ/JdvNq+fN6vxWOyIG9GB5A3 3i3g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmzAutk8JLpfEbFlYRMvIpt1JmQjNUqAWHWUuolXGozp4PA/pbCjvFnB79EQgzsmXC4BlAi
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.126.43 with SMTP id a31mr2649504yhi.154.1398434816205; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 07:06:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.60.5 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 07:06:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <53598854.2010201@joelhalpern.com>
References: <53597772.6000401@nostrum.com> <53598854.2010201@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:06:56 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+97oKPxMJC2zngqUwfRGCNXtP61rqsoRdCbhLAj+_30dZTVeg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Osborne <eric@notcom.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/6AdNvZ1fOOMAf6OLD_aK3xhjyY8
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, "A. Jean Mahoney" <mahoney@nostrum.com>
Subject: Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] review: draft-ietf-mpls-extended-admin-group-05
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 14:07:06 -0000

Hi Joel-

  Thanks for the review.  On your minor issue:
---
 I believe it is more accurate to say that it is to be used "when a
node wishes to advertise colors for a link which are not represented
in the first 32 bits of the color mask."  The node may only wish to
advertise colors 7 and 60, but that will require the EAG.
---

I see your point, but I'm having trouble coming up with obvious text.
Deciding which colors are represented in a color mask is up to the
operator, which means it would have to say something like

"when a node wishes to advertise colors for a link which the operator
has defined to be outside the first 32 bits of the color mask".

but this would be the only use of 'color mask' in the document, and
it's not one I've seen used in any other docs around link coloring.

The whole sentence you refer to is:

" The EAG sub-TLV is used in addition to the Administrative Groups
when a node wishes to advertise more than 32 colors for a link."

If I rephrased it as

" The EAG sub-TLV is used in addition to the Administrative Groups
when an operator wants to make more than 32 colors available for
advertisement on a link"

would that do it?
s/wishes/wants/ while I'm here.



eric


On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
>
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
> you may receive.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-mpls-extended-admin-group-05
>     Extended Administrative Groups in MPLS-TE
> Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
> Review Date: 24-April-2014
> IETF LC End Date: 06-May-2014
> IESG Telechat date: N/A
>
> Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standards RFC
>
> Major issues: N/A
>
> Minor issues:
>     I believe that the description of when to use this EAG is slightly
> misleading.  The text says that EAG is to be used "when a node wishes to
> advertise more than 32 colors for a link."  I believe it is more accurate to
> say that it is to be used "when a node wishes to advertise colors for a link
> which are not represented in the first 32 bits of the color mask."  The node
> may only wish to advertise colors 7 and 60, but that will require the EAG.
>
> Nits/editorial comments: N/A
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email