Re: [nvo3] Document shepherd comments on draft-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework-04

[Anoop Ghanwani <[e-mail]>]

Hi Matthew,

Is there a timeline that the MBONED folks are working with?

Thanks,
Anoop

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 2:39 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Anoop
>
> Thanks for the new version.
>
> Just a heads up that, as suggested previously, we have asked MBONED to
> review the draft. They will send any comments to the NVO3 working group
> list.
>
> Best regards
>
> Matthew
>
> From: <[e-mail]> on behalf of EXT Anoop Ghanwani <
> [e-mail]>
> Date: Tuesday, 10 May 2016 at 06:28
>
> To: Matthew Bocci <[e-mail]>
> Cc: "[e-mail]" <
> [e-mail]>, Benson Schliesser <
> [e-mail]>, NVO3 <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: [nvo3] Document shepherd comments on
> draft-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework-04
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
> Thanks for the clarification.  We have submitted -05
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework-05
> to address your comments.
>
> Let us know if it looks good to proceed.
>
> Thanks,
> Anoop
>
> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Anoop
>>
>> The ‘3’ in NVO3 comes from the original title we used during the BoF,
>> which was 'Network Virtualization over Layer 3’. The ‘3’ then subesequently
>> stuck.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>>
>> From: <[e-mail]> on behalf of EXT Anoop Ghanwani <
>> [e-mail]>
>> Date: Friday, 6 May 2016 at 01:19
>> To: Matthew Bocci <[e-mail]>
>> Cc: "[e-mail]" <
>> [e-mail]>, Benson Schliesser <
>> [e-mail]>, NVO3 <[e-mail]>
>> Subject: Re: [nvo3] Document shepherd comments on
>> draft-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework-04
>>
>> Matthew,
>>
>> Many thanks for the review/comments.  Please see inline.
>>
>> Anoop
>>
>> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <
>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> Authors
>>>
>>> I think this draft is mostly good to progress, but I have a few comments
>>> that I think should be addressed before I forward it to the IESG for
>>> publication.
>>> I have also forwarded the draft to the chairs of the MBONED working
>>> group to see if it needs further review and will wait for their response
>>> before proceeding.
>>>
>>> Here are my comments:
>>>
>>> (1) Title:
>>> “A Framework for Multicast in NVO3”
>>> Please expand NVO3 in the title. Similar to the architecture draft, this
>>> might be better as “A Framework for Multicast in Data Centre
>>> Network Virtualisation Overlays (NVO3)”.
>>>
>>
>> Will do.
>>
>> (As an aside, why do we have a "3" in the acronym when it doesn't appear
>> anywhere in the expansion?  I know it's kind of late to be asking that. :))
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> (2) Throughout: Please make sure you expand acronyms on first use,
>>> throughout, e.g. mDNS in the Introduction.
>>>
>>> Will do.
>>
>>
>>> (3) Section 3, first paragraph.
>>> This references STT. It might be better to reference the encapsulations
>>> that have been adopted by the working group (GUE, GENEVE, and VXLAN-GPE)
>>>  rather than an individual draft submission.
>>>
>>> I will add them.
>>
>>
>>> (4) Section 3.4, last paragraph:
>>> S/main/maintain
>>>
>>> Will fix.
>>
>>
>>> (5) Section 9, References
>>> You have split these into Normative and Informative references. However,
>>> you draft is informational, so I am not sure it makes sense to have any
>>> normative references. Further, you have included information documents such
>>> as the NVO3 architecture as normative references.
>>>
>>
>> This follows from what the guidance from the IESG:
>> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/normative-informative.html
>> >>>
>> Within an RFC, references to other documents fall into two general
>> categories: "normative" and "informative". Normative references specify
>> documents that must be read to _understand_ or implement the technology in
>> the new RFC, or whose technology must be present for the technology in the
>> new RFC to work.
>> >>>
>>
>> Have the authors misinterpreted the IESG guidance?
>>
>>
>>> Please also include the full draft reference and version you are
>>> referencing (e.g. draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-03) rather than just the title of a
>>> draft.
>>>
>>>
>> Will do.
>>
>> (6) ID-Nits
>>> Please can you run ID-Nits on the draft and clear any relevant errors
>>> and warnings.
>>>
>>> Will do.
>>
>
>