Re: [mpls] This is not a last call! draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-08.txt

[Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>]

I appreciate the wording of requirement 7 in section 3.1 (General 
Requirements).  That seems to make clear the scoping of these requirements.

Major:

     I keep re-reading requirement 34 that indication of post-stack data 
must be consistent with RFC 3031 and I am left very confused as to what 
it means.  It doesn't say that there MUST be an indication in the 
stack.  It seems to allow for it being magically known?   That doesn't 
seem like a requirement.  Please clarify or remove.

     Requirement 43 in section 3.5 (Requirements on Ancillary Data) is 
either an unclear restatement that in-stack or post-stack data MUST have 
indications, or it is some other requirement not consistent with our 
ongoing work.  I recommend removing it.  This seems related to 
requirement 44, which I would also recommend removing.

     I find requirement 50 in section 3.5 (Requirements on Ancillary 
Data) which claims to require a means to "verify the integrity of 
ancillary data processed by LSR" to be confusing. Despite what we may or 
may not have written in RFC 3552 we do not have as far as I know means 
to verify the integrity of anything related to MPLS.  I can vaguely 
imagine an OAM mechanism implied by this requirement, but I doubt that 
is what is meant.  Please clarify or remove?

     Requirement 53 in section 3.5 (Requirements on Ancillary Data) 
seems to prohibit an intermediate LSR which is pushing on labels and NAI 
from pushing on ancillary data along with them. Such a prohibition seems 
to be a contradict the WG agreements. Please fix.

Minor:

  Is requirement 5 of section 3.1 (General Requirements) intended to 
prevent MNA from covering Entropy.  It seems to, as it says that MNA 
solutions MUST NOT obsolete existing MPLS mechanisms (e.g. ELI / EL)?  
This also seems related to requirement 41.

Would it be helpful to elaborate requirement 21 in section 3.4 
(Requirements on Network Action Indicators) to include text that control 
or management mechanisms may be used to meet this requirement?

In requirement 22 (apparently related to requirement 21) what does "in 
the way the imposing node intends" mean?   The text seems more specific 
than just understanding the operation to be performed.

Requirement 47 in section 3.5 (Requirements on Ancillary Data) seems 
vacuous.  I can not see how its presence would affect any solution proposal.

Nit:

MNA should be expanded upon first use.  (It appears in requirement 2 of 
section 3.1, General Requirements, but does not appear in section 1.1, 
Terminology. It appears expanded as the title of section 3, but without 
the acronym.)

Is requirement 23 redundant with requirement 24?

Does requirement 25 allowing solutions with only on scope contradict 
requirement 23?  Or 24?

The final "this" in requirement 36 is a little vague.  I think it means 
"this ancillary data"

Is requirement 49 in section 3.5 (Requirements on Ancillary Data) 
needed?  It seems to be covered by requirement 19 that actions need to 
be clear about their relationship to processing / mis-ordering.

Yours,

Joel Halpern

On 1/3/2024 10:20 AM, Matthew Bocci (Nokia) wrote:
> Hi WG
>
> Thank you to everyone who reviewed the previous version of the draft and provided valuable comments.
>
> There were many comments embedded in the WG last call discussions on the list and we made numerous changes to address these, as well as some other editorial improvements to the text. This made it a challenge to track all the improvements.
>
> Please refer to the following diff to see where changes were made: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-07&url2=draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-08&difftype=--html
>
> We would greatly appreciate feedback on the updates and any further comments on the draft.
>
> Best regards
> Matthew
>
>
> On 11/12/2023, 14:26, "Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional information.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
> The authors have been busy making changes based on the extensive review
> comments and discussions arising from the first last call for this document.
>
>
> It would be really helpful if people could start to look through the
> document and see which of their concerns have been addressed and what is
> still outstanding.
>
>
> Given the volume of comments, it would be no surprise if the authors need to
> make a further round of adjustments, but starting to look at the text (and
> possibly focusing on the diffs) might speed things along.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: I-D-Announce <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> On Behalf Of
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Sent: 11 December 2023 12:05
> To: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-08.txt
>
>
> Internet-Draft draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-08.txt is now available. It
> is
> a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) WG of the IETF.
>
>
> Title: Requirements for Solutions that Support MPLS Network Actions
> Authors: Matthew Bocci
> Stewart Bryant
> John Drake
> Name: draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-08.txt
> Pages: 11
> Dates: 2023-12-11
>
>
> Abstract:
>
>
> This document specifies requirements for the development of MPLS
> network actions which affect the forwarding or other processing of
> MPLS packets. These requirements are informed by a number of
> proposals for additions to the MPLS information in the labeled packet
> to allow such actions to be performed, either by a transit or
> terminating LSR (i.e. the LER).
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements/>
>
>
> There is also an HTMLized version available at:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-08 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-08>
>
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-0 <https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-0>
> 8
>
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at:
> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> I-D-Announce mailing list
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls