Re: [mpls] MPLS-RT review of draft-pdutta-mpls-tldp-hello-reduce-03

[Lizhong Jin<[e-mail]>]

Hi all,
I've reviewed this draft, and have two comments that need to be clarifed:
1. Target Hello tracks the liveness of hello adjacency, while LDP 
keepalive tracks the liveness of session. Do you mean it is not necessary 
to track the liveness of hello adjacency, or substitute it with liveness 
tracking of session? Hello address maybe different with trasport address.
2. Target hellos are not only used for liveness track, but also parameter 
negotiation and updating. When negotiated to infinite, what time interval 
would be used to send the updated hello (e.g, hello with new Optional 
Parameters in potential draft-pdutta-mpls-ldp-adj-capability) message? UDP 
hello is not reliable, would be renegotiated to configured hello hold time 
first?

Summary of review:
a. whether the document is coherent?
Good description on the motivation, need more detail in technical 
description (e.g, refer to my second comment).

b. is it useful? 
Yes.

d. is technically sound ?
Need some clarification.

e. is ready to be considered for WG adoption ?
After clarification, it should be ready for WG adoption.

Regards
Lizhong


Ross Callon <[e-mail]> wrote 2012/07/18 05:49:55:

> Markus, Lizhong, Thomas;
> 
> You have been selected as an MPLS Review team reviewers for
> draft-pdutta-mpls-tldp-hello-reduce-03
> 
> Note to authors: You have been CC’d on this email so that you can know 
that 
> this review is going on. However, please do not review your own 
document. 
> 
> Reviews should comment on whether the document is coherent, is it useful
> (ie, is it likely to be actually useful in operational networks), and is
> the document technically sound?  We are interested in knowing whether 
the 
> document is ready to be considered for WG adoption (ie, it doesn’t have 
to
> be perfect at this point, but should be a good start). 
> 
> Reviews should be sent to the document authors, WG co-chairs and 
secretary,
> and CC’d to the MPLS WG email list. If necessary, comments may be sent 
> privately to only the WG chairs. 
> 
> Are you able to review this draft by August 3, 2012 (ie, the end of the 
IETF 
> meeting in Vancouver)? We understand that this is somewhat short notice 
and 
> that you might have something else to do the week of the IETF, so let us 

> know if you need slightly more time. 
> 
> Thanks, Ross
> (as MPLS WG chair)
> 
> PS: I noticed that Tom Nadeau’s email address listed in the draft is
> out of date. This email is being CC’d to his updated address. 
>