Re: [Ntp] [EXTERNAL] WGLC - draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp

I have read the draft and although I do consider it sufficiently ready
in its current state, I agree with Martin and consider all his
suggestions improvements that would be worth making.

Kind regards,
David

On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 12:41 PM <martin.langer=40ptb.de@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Dear Miroslav, dear all,
>
> I have reviewed your draft and have a few final comments.
> Otherwise, I think this document is ready to be submitted to the IESG for publication.
>
>
> #1: On the first page you wrote: "specific PTP transport (e.g. UDPv4, UDPv6, 802.3)". I would suggest the following: "specific PTP transport (e.g. UDP over IPv4, UDP over IPv6, 802.3)".
> --> I consider this change optional.
>
>
>
> #2: On page two it says: "It adds a new extension field (TLV) for PTP". My suggestion: "It adds a new type-length-value (TLV) extension field for PTP".
> --> I see this change as optional, but I would prefer it.
>
>
>
> #3: Section1 has only one subsection. From a structural point of view, there should always be at least two subsection. My suggestion: Simply insert another subsection before the text "The client-server mode of NTP, even if using the PTP transport, has several advantages to PTP using multicast or unicast messaging:". E.g. with the title: "1.1. Main Features and Advantages". The current subsection "1.1. Requirements Lanuage" will therefore become 1.2.
> --> I see this change as a recommendation, but I would much prefer it.
>
>
>
> #4: On page 3 it says: "NTP is more secure. It can use existing security mechanisms ". I am not sure if this is true. The PTP header/PTP timestamp are not protected. For example, NTS would only secure the NTP packet embedded in PTP (also mentioned in section 2), right? Could you clarify this again? Maybe I just didn't understand it correctly.
> --> A brief clarification (possibly an additional sentence) of what is protected and what is not would be highly recommended.
>
>
> #5: In chapter 2 it says: "The originTimestamp field and all fields of the header SHOULD be zero, except:". My recommendations:
>   - 1: instead of "the header" better "the PTP header"
>   - 2: should "minorVersionPTP" also be included in the following list? Then you will support PTPv2.0 and PTPv2.1.
> --> However, I see this change as optional.
>
>
>
> #6: Chapter 3 describes an NTP extension field. I recommend 1-2 more sentences about the fact that:
>   - Type and Length are each a 16-bit unsigned integer in network byte order.
>   - Length represents the size of the complete extension field (including the Ext Field Header).
> -->I see this change as a recommendation, but I would prefer it.
>
>
>
> kind regards,
> Martin
>
> __________________________________________
> Dr.-Ing. Martin Langer
> Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB)
> Working Group 4.42 "Dissemination of Time"
> Bundesallee 100,
> 38116 Braunschweig (Germany)
> Tel.: +49 531 592-4470
> E-Mail: martin.langer@ptb.de
> __________________________________________
>
>
>
> ----- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -----
> Von: "Denis Reilly" <dreilly=40equinix.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> Gesendet von: "ntp" <ntp-bounces@ietf.org>
> An: "Karen ODonoghue" <kodonog@pobox.com>, "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>
> CC:
> Betreff: Re: [Ntp] [EXTERNAL] WGLC - draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp
> Datum: Fr, 8. Dez 2023 21:04
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I have reviewed this document (NTP over PTP) and have no further comments.
>
> I believe this document is ready to be submitted to the IESG for publication.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> --
>
> Denis Reilly
>
> Principal Timing Architect, Equinix Precision Time
>
> Equinix | dreilly@equinix.com  |  +1-585-282-7899
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: ntp <ntp-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Karen ODonoghue <kodonog@pobox.com>
> Date: Thursday, November 30, 2023 at 4:35 PM
> To: ntp@ietf.org <ntp@ietf.org>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Ntp] WGLC - draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp
>
> NTP WG members,
>
>
>
> This email initiates the NTP working group last call for the NTP over PTP document.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp/01/
>
>
>
> Please review this document and respond with an email on the following two questions:
>
> 1) Please review the document closely and provide comments. It is also only eleven pages in total so it is a quick read.
>
> 2) Please state whether or not you think this document is ready to be submitted to the IESG for publication (pending resolution of any comments you have made).
>
>
>
> Given the brevity of the document, this WGLC will conclude on Wednesday 13 November.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Karen and Dieter
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list
> ntp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list
> ntp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp