Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-12.txt>
Huub helvoort <huub.van.helvoort@huawei.com> Thu, 03 October 2013 13:27 UTC
Return-Path: <huub.van.helvoort@huawei.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 63C9C21F9A49; Thu, 3 Oct 2013 06:27:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ve5boVHbv1re; Thu, 3 Oct 2013 06:27:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B3421E8063; Thu, 3 Oct 2013 06:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AWK07469; Thu, 03 Oct 2013 13:22:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.146.0; Thu, 3 Oct 2013 14:22:00 +0100
Received: from LHREML509-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.201.4.177]) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.201.5.240]) with mapi id 14.03.0146.000; Thu, 3 Oct 2013 14:22:15 +0100
From: Huub helvoort <huub.van.helvoort@huawei.com>
To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-12.txt>
Thread-Index: Ac7AFRRiZXQ2TaqrQyKn1YTQ2cj7dwAJk7pc
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 13:22:14 +0000
Message-ID: <73E555AA235F3846B8051DB38C8776272E665629@lhreml509-mbx>
References: <031601cec015$591026c0$0b307440$@olddog.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <031601cec015$591026c0$0b307440$@olddog.co.uk>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.202.112.112]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-12.txt>
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 13:27:40 -0000
Hello Adrian, Thnak you for your feedback/review. You write: "can be handled as IETF last call comments", so there is no need for revision 13 then. Cheers, Huub. -- ================================================================ Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else... ________________________________________ From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [ietf-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Adrian Farrel [adrian@olddog.co.uk] Sent: 03 October 2013 10:48 To: ietf@ietf.org Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: RE: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-12.txt> Thanks for this document which was surprisingly readable. I have a number of comments from my AD review, but they are all trivial and can be handled as IETF last call comments. Thanks, Adrian --- Nurit will want to change the minor details or her affiliation. --- Abstract Expand MPLS-TP and PW on first use. Expand MS s/recommendations/Recommendations/ >>> Apply throughout document s/nor/or/ --- Section 1 s/telecommunication/Telecommunication/ --- Section 1.2 s/Administration and Maintenance/Administration, and Maintenance/ --- Section 3.4 s/APPENDIX/Appendix/ --- Section 3.5 Please expand PW --- Section 3.7 One might ask whether a co-routed bidirectional path that traverses a LAG or a link bundle uses the same component links in both directions. --- Section 3.8 could probably usefully mention routing along with signaling. --- Section 3.11 s/physical channels/a physical channel/ --- Section 3.16 Please expand LSR --- One paragraph in 3.17 is a bit wild. Therefore, in the context of MPLS-TP LSP or PW Maintenance Entity (defined below) LERs and T-PEs can be MEPs while LSRs and S-PEs can be MIPs. In the case of Tandem Connection Maintenance Entity (defined below), LSRs and S-PEs can be either MEPs or MIPs. s/context of/context of a/ "PW Maintenance Entity" is not defined below (I think). Please expand LER I don't find the definition of "Tandem Connection Maintenance Entity" Maybe you could say ...the case of a Maintenance Entity for a Tandem Connection (defined below) Please expand S-PE --- Section 3.19 Penultimate paragraph Second instance s/(e.g. count packets)./(e.g. counts packets)./ --- Section 3.23 s/described in three ways:/described in one of three ways:/ s/Sub-Path Maintenance Element, and/Sub-Path Maintenance Element, or/ s/as a Tandem Connections./as a Tandem Connection./ --- Section 3.23.2 Section header s/(SMPE):/(SPME):/ --- Section 3.35 The use of pipe ("|") and curly braces ("{" and "}") could usefully be replaced with English language. > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce- > bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG > Sent: 02 October 2013 22:45 > To: IETF-Announce > Cc: mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-12.txt> (A Thesaurus for the > Terminology used in Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) > drafts/RFCs and ITU-T's Transport Network Recommendations.) to Informational > RFC > > > The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG > (mpls) to consider the following document: > - 'A Thesaurus for the Terminology used in Multiprotocol Label Switching > Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) drafts/RFCs and ITU-T's Transport > Network Recommendations.' > <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-12.txt> as Informational RFC
- Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta… Huub helvoort