Re: [mpls] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-14: (with COMMENT)

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Tue, 07 March 2017 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.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 D7B891295CD; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 09:38:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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=gmail.com
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 HiINMGMQ4Yaf; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 09:38:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x229.google.com (mail-oi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C90E41295C6; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 09:38:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-x229.google.com with SMTP id 2so5529538oif.0; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 09:38:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BTggiW930pcdDymarh0DSBG4sa++XTgQKflMMFPcx5Q=; b=j06hqAYRtGw60JSAQ07tQUps7CSjHL91msPWniZAaoQfrnBK6sJmlPPgwYP418zWja BD+WwX03o7RLB2t7RXZa6TplVyodqLdzZkCOJUCNE/SEhLFOIBy8MN41FoLgvh+QNoad AQSam9Jau3ev6rdyZvp3235TC9wmYIMS3vXxx5i/L9Vhy8hTIsp/vbUxWv97/KrBiBOA 9UgYPYucU9OSZf3QioxM2yLN9gF8CtixswFNmw3GZvKK7+mnV60usrlIudtPxDPJ3sEX RynbzAq9IlKmLWOKVUW31B0AzOT8Dknfr4+Sst40kGIatw0gQljZQf6F7X9a+QQz0ik6 1xhA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=BTggiW930pcdDymarh0DSBG4sa++XTgQKflMMFPcx5Q=; b=PrrKlVfYVZ1T762YcmeYbLdq5QxRTKFqgXtuxvJ1D9TBMnMErAgr1FM/okWxmXJlpK 5E2jLNwUTapr/B3Lp3uf9/2u4lN92TUS4lDgV2ZSetllrBqTVo3A3n1Eo0rOKpk0jrcj 0wphqvzh/fJrGv5C5APvNrJsDhSbivq9bRc8qsVLuj+wDcBCy6rfrlB8S+jUBwly/gR/ G5XRO3M+lM0G7unbveWbfN27lM0azEsfwQQEOqE/kuheXUFm4Seq4zx7GNZUjZwLHsDz 65ttf8ZGLYPdSVP2izLXwaqLQFTA5/GNh2lE91bheHuBIj/8L/WcfVABop7Nh+LZOemL rtxQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mvOlXD53F/4z29QVSRYklFh9NvQSi1Y2I0FjgoLUoY3eUrx7ngx81vlzVMzQaQOnh7B1O5iJAQMCh1Bw==
X-Received: by 10.202.181.135 with SMTP id e129mr945921oif.124.1488908337135; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 09:38:57 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.21.21 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 09:38:56 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <148841019992.7040.2698428179443970594.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <148841019992.7040.2698428179443970594.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 09:38:56 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXW5Zu36+JjSrmVi1p6kxP5qnd2V_sqR1J3HogefsF7RA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113cbe4c89caba054a277c7c
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/CYg16n2f72S3nkYP8c4CLx9aRtg>
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time@ietf.org, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-14: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 17:39:00 -0000

Hi Ben, et.al,
we've published the new version of the draft. It includes changes to
address your comments and many others. Hope I haven't missed any.

Regards,
Greg

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>; wrote:

> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-14: No Objection
>
> 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:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I have no objection, but do have some a few minor comments:
>
> Substantive:
>
> -2.1, 4th paragraph from end: Can you offer guidance on what might
> constitute a reasonably bound wait time?\
>
> -2.1, 2nd paragraph from end: "... MUST NOT do both": What's the scope of
> that MUST NOT? Does it mean MUST NOT ever? NUST NOT in the same
> message?
>
> Editorial:
> - Abstract: The last paragraph is a single, long sentence. Please
> consider breaking it into simpler sentences.
>
> - 2.1, paragraph 9: "This bit, once it is set by a two-
>    step mode device, MUST stay set accordingly": Can that MUST be stated
> in process terms? That is, <actors>  MUST NOT unset this bit..."
>
> -2.1, paragraph 11:  "Without loss of generality should note
>    that handling of Sync event messages..." : I don't follow the
> sentence; are words missing and/or out of order?
> -- "Following outlines handling of PTP Sync event message by the two-step
> RTM node.": I think there's a missing "the" at the start. It's absence
> completely changes the meaning of "following outlines"-- as written it
> seem like the verb is "following", but I think you mean it to be
> "outlines".
> -- I have trouble matching some pronouns to their antecedents in the rest
> of the paragraph.
>
>
>