Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Sun, 27 September 2015 16:24 UTC

To: Lizhong Jin <lizho.jin@gmail.com>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, mahoney@nostrum.com, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
References: <CAH==cJx9_U+7T2tGw3Zi99K+hBBYLnPztZK2UXnimBG2nKWwEQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <5608181D.3050600@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 12:23:57 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAH==cJx9_U+7T2tGw3Zi99K+hBBYLnPztZK2UXnimBG2nKWwEQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/91xqgoLingMqSUjBADoGQJVxZyE>
Subject: Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10
Precedence: list

Yes, I think adding that would improve readability.

Yours,
Joel

On 9/26/15 9:04 PM, Lizhong Jin wrote:
> Hi Joel,
> Sorry for the late reply, I missed this email.
> Thanks for the second round review. You are right, the stack will grows
> downward, but only with the relay nodes, not all nodes along the LSP.
> The mechanism is described in section 4.2 paragraph 4.
> Do you agree if I add the following:
> This stack grows downward, with relay node addresses further along the
> LSP appearing lower down in the stack. Please refer to section 4.2 for
> the relay node discovery mechanism.
>
> Regards
> Lizhong
>
>
>
>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     Message: 1
>     Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 21:35:34 -0400
>     From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com
>     <mailto:jmh@joelhalpern.com>>
>     To: "A. Jean Mahoney" <mahoney@nostrum.com
>     <mailto:mahoney@nostrum.com>>, General Area Review Team
>              <gen-art@ietf.org <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>>,
>     "mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>" <mpls@ietf.org
>     <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>>
>     Subject: [mpls] [Gen-art] Review:
>              draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10
>     Message-ID: <55FB6A66.5050709@joelhalpern.com
>     <mailto:55FB6A66.5050709@joelhalpern.com>>
>     Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
>     I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>     Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>     by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>     like any other last call comments.
>
>     For more information, please see the FAQ at
>
>     <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
>     Document: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10
>           Relayed Echo Reply mechanism for LSP Ping
>     Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
>     Review Date: 17-September-2015
>     IETF LC End Date: 25-Sept-2015
>     IESG Telechat date: N/A
>
>     Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard
>
>     Major issues: none
>
>     Minor issues:
>           In this document, the address stack grows downward.  While
>     reasonable, I think that in the absence of warning of this, readers are
>     likely to be confused when they read the detailed procedures.  I think
>     the document would be helped by adding the sentence:
>           "This stack grows downward, with addresses further along the LSP
>     appearing lower down in the stack."
>          This could appear right after:
>           "-  Stack of Relayed Addresses: a list of relay node addresses."
>     in section 3.2.
>
>     Nits/editorial comments:
>
>
>
>     ------------------------------
>

[mpls] [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping… Joel M. Halpern
Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-… Lizhong Jin
Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-… Joel M. Halpern
Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-… Jari Arkko