Re: [mpls] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-14: (with COMMENT)

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 27 February 2017 17:46 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@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 900DB129996; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:46:41 -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 U4hu7YKJqVz0; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:46:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw0-x22a.google.com (mail-yw0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22a]) (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 5BD5412A2C9; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:46:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yw0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id p77so41869982ywg.1; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:46:33 -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=HXaL0nt9WjWfv8WdSu4B/Uz5rl9XFc+KdYAZ2OUlztE=; b=VFXwtSy3aToJMKn8zMo4Urko/EnzXY0XvxM2TnRVl8iuIsli6h/hI78l2+MYCY3pqy eVpBneVjXtUA5ZatssgiuUmypquo1Gy5/DbSHOIT12oRAqvgeapoB6j46Nu2ba6OG/mo ww2sYMgrOntyvA/UwZIH84bsjOSpuf202oW5xJtbUWEs7/fu5dnbBK+r4V4+Hh7emlbF 0oP0AH4PG2wyRYSlcyOUMKYsS4yRfMCqdWVOyGjR6g7zRoAAt/KPb66qepK7uCgU3zrE I860a56Xv78UJNsEqKlH3v1hXcEQXjWmkBmouG67wxbvtDJG9fI6xcuMxd/ll/tl/LqL s09Q==
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=HXaL0nt9WjWfv8WdSu4B/Uz5rl9XFc+KdYAZ2OUlztE=; b=LeHwfzCd0bBWE3bVtToxf6U4R4CbcxLPhE0uftIsn2okJLHGeg2JHJiE9DGEoP0Sfe QZNW0fE/J9OxyUhTqTBgSjQdIJKivzlZPSQt+BQQwqjvnjb8r/fIlFbg6VP0pGrEQUA2 icGLygTtWk1Rf6etp6nJVde1shh06FMJN1q4cqZT1zs/sLaMylwR0soFMyyVJMHSolzW 7x+jVhFusVJM3UB0f+bw2EgxgviJ7khLOJltNNqpaJ5j0PL6hu9xjeWLIw7ipPFiQiGU V54hf+tbTQ69M3J1/zY6uXzHZvqMVESlgDwoy58KLiTPCxux2EfCbJ8TgektF5Yj+h41 7fwg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kmDt3qAMdwS+Lcs+aYv7TRX5VYPsZmrYgM7j+tqZx4VVL5Z/HsBuE93EALWhweFHoHRLxFrFkZNQ2vcg==
X-Received: by 10.129.79.16 with SMTP id d16mr13542351ywb.64.1488217592634; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:46:32 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.234.9 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:46:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.37.234.9 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:46:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-cj3bYxiQck1UCzXwePZ1ka9f=w0334MrZeB+FOpQ69mQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <148814606376.2949.10868917655692470857.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+RyBmXFjsYEmhEPbcWr143GtM0DDDaAoaGrfCL8BNE+F7qTwg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-c4c8CM77AF1Z61pH6-c4RpsW=YjoiauWNSsCG7o592uA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+RyBmUT=xmYw11m5wsypvd2ibSCdgfQOjZM=YknTiYKrRv1Qw@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-c+NMA+9=YP+f8U3a92dLm_ODGu26ZZDYrd8Z+zLfJhBQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-cj3bYxiQck1UCzXwePZ1ka9f=w0334MrZeB+FOpQ69mQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:46:32 -0600
Message-ID: <CAKKJt-e1aPM8j8nv+2cSwC1_8cehjbKaKwYWPdUmKJBNm5nTZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114dbe76f528b7054986a835
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/gmLX8gXYHlzRkyYWN6uE_TVrhr0>
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time@ietf.org, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, iesg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls] Spencer Dawkins' 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: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:46:41 -0000

Hi, Greg,

On Feb 27, 2017 11:13, "Greg Mirsky" <gregimirsky@gmail.com>; wrote:

Hi Spencer,
yes, only PTP has defined operation of the transparent clock and how to use
the residence time to improve accuracy of distributed time.


(Remembering that this is a no-blocking comment)

I'd suggest removing the text reference to NTP in the Introduction, and
mentioning that you're allocating the value for NTP in Section 7.2, but
that NTP can't make use of this mechanism unless it adds support for
transparent clock.

Does that make sense?

Spencer

Regards,
Greg

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <
spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>; wrote:

> Hi, Greg,
>
> On Feb 27, 2017 09:55, "Greg Mirsky" <gregimirsky@gmail.com>; wrote:
>
> Hi Spencer,
> thank you for your thorough review and the question.
> NTP yet doesn't use transparent clock paradigm but in section 3 G-ACh for
> Residence Time Measurement we've noted that NTP may be one type of TLV and
> have requested appropriate allocation by IANA in the new sub-registry MPLS
> RTM TLV Registry (section 7.2). Thus, if NTP will be enhanced to use
> transparent clock, the RTM over MPLS will be capable to support it.
> We're open to your suggestions to make it clearer.
>
>
> So, is it correct to say that PTP is the only time protocol that uses the
> transparent clock paradigm today?
>
> Spencer
>
> Kind regards,
> Greg
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Spencer Dawkins <
> spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>; wrote:
>
>> Spencer Dawkins 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'm a bit confused on one point. There's one reference to NTP in the
>> Introduction, everything else is about PTP, but the specification never
>> actually says if this mechanism is intended to be usable for NTP as well.
>> Could that be clearer?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>