Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip-02

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 13 March 2019 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 2F86B124B0C; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 08:18:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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=cooperw.in header.b=nBmZWTOR; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=1uxFvYaM
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 d1QuJTDuvrWg; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 08:18:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40E101277D6; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 08:18:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 560DE2859B; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 11:18:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 13 Mar 2019 11:18:04 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=g Uy37aT0Pz58WzxgqXl1HxL432W3+ktbz1UFQGKA0Ik=; b=nBmZWTORGVg7KdnAw MTdCiTZGJsQkYH5fnvZoOXbS4ZBn8cAQoD5LW/08HYC1hWBHPFtnq8qL8t/RK9pM buI+TomPKf0Pyopkwg4AzzjhvDe5hyI1eDyqQWQCFeeU9sXEHvKI/ZYrz4jmbX3I wBsk7IhJTr43X1zX6WTpGXxlD6Th7dCKPHO37L4VXPUDGvJZlEV4Uq5M2FJsLxYb fUng3Lo5c5qp2P+AAQH74aKuyEpOHtXEcGdUmWeQzT5W0xiq+U4UF4TSSzNDoK/g vvRsNAW1tKJHJrSbg9BDozsRKb1f39/rtrZCA3KiEq0ZkKlAum0hVhJPjffon4sk fXbRQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=gUy37aT0Pz58WzxgqXl1HxL432W3+ktbz1UFQGKA0 Ik=; b=1uxFvYaMivmUSxAwg3P97kMFyGc05osqR6f4A6yxCSxdwuMZb4+FJh5xR /oFyoZgWtstJazbz8PtjiUu2tBKYuqEfTFOLYe1XZ++8zA3MebLD5cowz9f+xQqb 7uX5Ro2rzEI9NBAYPCngwghXzj0QyMzg135+lU8ik+4eTfXEgR2enKFmaxGYHabt ey+0RzLNl6WBgsa3tu9vEq3b9Rwqo4Db8PHCgrwSsM4StcuAbVdUr4X8M/Ry8rF0 BZwBvCCcZK4DMVkeEkfoLaxSWtMUbNYJKvPXSZnccr++JTiwn++couI6ES8RhDZf 2DX9jrL7ORRpMemotOulN/Z2KSVXw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:Kx-JXJWRe9_b3qa16RXVV6pEcgrXJMGiIU3N1_QWg3KGmvu-GluWAA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedutddrhedtgdejhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtdejnecuhfhrohhmpeetlhhishhs rgcuvehoohhpvghruceorghlihhsshgrsegtohhophgvrhifrdhinheqnecuffhomhgrih hnpehivghtfhdrohhrghenucfkphepudejfedrfeekrdduudejrdeiheenucfrrghrrghm pehmrghilhhfrhhomheprghlihhsshgrsegtohhophgvrhifrdhinhenucevlhhushhtvg hrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:Kx-JXHbo5HBr8SyorgE2H83WgJbEpb4Ze31qoaVWgI-6I5OfViqkvQ> <xmx:Kx-JXP0zWgic845lTW1SobXe_QWd_KBvGhUs1qJLwZzngv1X-Wu0Bw> <xmx:Kx-JXJi-7zrPGQBfXZJewi2nAqaeWkfYEkcOiHgHjpW-04ks7i4FWg> <xmx:LB-JXLaMHd2ImDeweV4dK-6UgBTlowRka-vYouM6NJomnQCovVYJPA>
Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro5.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.65]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0DEF7E456D; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 11:18:03 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <03b801d4cde5$805c6250$811526f0$@olddog.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 11:18:01 -0400
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, IETF MPLS List <mpls@ietf.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip.all@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <77F6EC08-297A-49CA-A864-103071713A19@cooperw.in>
References: <155067766687.31388.18349714938448955572@ietfa.amsl.com> <04c001d4c938$7e3d86e0$7ab894a0$@olddog.co.uk> <03b801d4cde5$805c6250$811526f0$@olddog.co.uk>
To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/7lNZJTlydWewK0txoxsrQk13iO0>
Subject: Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip-02
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 15:18:08 -0000

Robert, thank you for your review. Adrian, thank you for your responses. I entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa

> On Feb 26, 2019, at 10:11 AM, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>; wrote:
> 
> Hey Robert,
> 
> Some detailed responses.
> 
> The revision will be posted when the authors have signed off.
> 
> Regards,
> Adrian
> 
>> The 2nd sentence of the introduction is complex. It should
>> be easy to simplify.
> 
> Done
> 
>> It would help to place the reference to draft-ietf-mpls-spring-entropy
>> label at "If encoding of entropy is desired". (Or if some other reference
>> is better, use that)
> 
> Used RFC 6790.
> 
>> In that same paragraph, something is wrong at "make use of entropy
>> label mechanism." Should that be "the entropy label mechanism"?
> 
> Yes. I have done some gardening.
> 
>> SRGB is used without expansion.
> 
> Fixed.
> 
>> Where is "the lower bound" of an SRGB defined? The string "lower bound"
>> doesn't occur in either of the routing-extensions drafts referenced where
>> SRGB is first used.
> 
> The concept of an SRGB is defined in RFC 8402. I've added a reference to this at the first use of 'SRGB'.
> 
>> Section 3.1 is about ostensibly about constructing a FIB entry, but its
>> last step is sending a packet.
> 
> Yes. Overly enthusiastic engineers! 😊
> I have jiggled the text so that the last couple of points are about how the FIB is used.
> 
>> The first sentence in section 3.2 is more complex than it needs to be. It
>> should be easy to simplify.
> 
> OK
> 
>> It would be nice if you could make the differences between the routers in
>> figures 3 and 4 visually apparent rather than relying on text to explain the
>> difference. Something like (view in a fixed width font):
> 
> We looked at this, but decided against. If we adopt some kind of notation, we will still need to explain it in the text, and the explanation will only complicate things.
> 
>> At the first paragraph on page 9: s/and then process/and then processes/
> 
> Yes
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art