[mpls] Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-15

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Hi Linda,
thank you for your review. Please find my notes below tagged GIM>>.

Regards,
Greg

On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 4:55 PM Linda Dunbar via Datatracker <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
> Review result: Has Issues
>
> I have reviewed this document as part of the Ops area directorate's ongoing
> effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
> comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Ops area directors.
> Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any
> other
> last-call comments.
>
> Summary:
> I find the intent of this document somewhat unclear. While the Introduction
> states that the purpose is to describe use cases requiring specialized
> forwarding hardware, the use cases in Section 2 primarily reference
> existing
> RFCs or drafts on specific topics.

GIM>> I will note that the Introduction doesn't mention the need for
"specialized forwarding hardware", but "special processing by forwarding
[deployed and developed in the future] hardware":
   This document describes use cases that introduce functions that
   require special processing by forwarding hardware.

> Is this draft intended to serve as a
> collection of RFCs or drafts that involve the use of MNA?

GIM>> Yes, that is the intention of the document to describe how MNA
enables realization of functions, e.g., IOAM, that are not support based on
the existing MPLS architecture.

> Given that each
> referenced RFC and draft already contains a detailed description of the
> issues
> it addresses, why need another RFC to link them all?
>
GIM>> AFAICS, that is the decision reached by the MPLS WG.

>
> My two cents,
> Linda Dunbar
>
>
>