[mpls] Martin Stiemerling's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path-04: (with DISCUSS)

"Martin Stiemerling" <mls.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 05 January 2016 21:47 UTC

Return-Path: <mls.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietf.org
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A2E31A92F4; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 13:47:06 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20160105214706.11111.8218.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 13:47:06 -0800
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/85mNNYfTzd2BhWLkOh6M3Ln6WHI>
Cc: mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path@ietf.org, mpls-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls] Martin Stiemerling's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path-04: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 21:47:06 -0000

Martin Stiemerling has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path-04: Discuss

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:


I am in favour of publishing this document, but I have two major points
that are not addressed in the document by now:

1) It is not clear for anybody what the expected size and sending
frequency of such MPLS-PLDM over IP/UDP responses are. This will
influence any measures an operator has to take in order to assure that
there is no congestion caused by these messages. I can understand that
this cannot be foreseen, but a few words considering this fact are
excellent to have in the document. 

2) This leads to my second point: the lack of any reference to RFC 5405
"Unicast UDP Usage Guidelines for Application Designers" and the content
out of this RFC that is applicable for this draft. There is no discussion
about this at all. Please note well that this is BCP 145. 

With regard to point 2): I can try to find some help from the transport
area, in case you need help.