[mpls] AD review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-p2mp-framework

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Sat, 28 December 2013 21:39 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA141AE363 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 13:39:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.147
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.347, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no
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 RZB-VIGS7qSk for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 13:39:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83B331AE35F for <mpls@ietf.org>; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 13:39:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rBSLdOXU007652; Sat, 28 Dec 2013 21:39:24 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (14.21.90.92.rev.sfr.net [92.90.21.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rBSLdMho007634 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 28 Dec 2013 21:39:23 GMT
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-p2mp-framework.all@tools.ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 21:39:28 -0000
Message-ID: <066901cf0415$4a41e310$dec5a930$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac8EFSDq7xKq0fuuRaSr2vJFI3xe3A==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: No
Cc: mpls@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls] AD review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-p2mp-framework
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 21:39:32 -0000

Thanks for this document.

I have done my usual AD review on receiving the publication request
and I find just a couple of nits that can be rolled into the IETF
last call which I will start forthwith.

Thanks,
Adrian

===

Dan will probably want to update his coordinates.

---

You don't need to be so enthusiastic with your acronyms in Section 1.2
The following are "well known" according to
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt

   GMPLS   Generalized MPLS
   LDP     Label Distribution Protocol
   MPLS    Multiprotocol Label Switching

There is a serial comma missing from
   OAM     Operations, Administration and Maintenance
The comma is also missing in your text.

---

In Section 1.3 you say

   There is no definition for MPLS TE-LSP support of multipoint-to-
   multipoint connectivity and none is anticipated.

Without opening up a discussion of whether what you cay is true, can you
say why it is relevant? Perhaps "This document is limited to a 
discussion of point-to-multipoint function and does not discuss 
multipoint-to-multipoint support." You might also move this to Section
1.1.