[OSPF] Adrian Farrel's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-14: (with DISCUSS)
"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 09 February 2015 21:19 UTC
Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 409781A8963; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 13:19:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 R2tm_qCnprkA; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 13:18:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFE891A892C; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 13:18:46 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.11.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20150209211846.23259.21822.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 13:18:46 -0800
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/71MxzTzQIDDB3-6BagLDe_J2UlE>
Cc: ospf@ietf.org, Ing-Wher Chen <ing-wher.chen@ericsson.com>, ospf-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: [OSPF] Adrian Farrel's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-14: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ospf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 21:19:01 -0000
Adrian Farrel has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-14: Discuss 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 http://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: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I've trimmed by Discuss to remove the pieces you have handled. Many thanks for that. ==== > Does this document really update 5340? > There is no mention of what this update is or why it is considered a > part of the standard implementation of OSPFv3 to include the features > described in this document. > > I suggest either dropping the update or clarifying how it works. > > (Note that idnits should have flagged this to you, but the shepherd > write-up says that this document doesn't change the status of any > existing RFCs.) We discussed this a little, and I got the impression that the conclusion was that "update" really was intended. In this case you need to (as also discussed): - make this clear in the Abstract (as indicated by idnits) - spend some time in the document (probably the Introduction) explaining how the update works (which is, I believe you are saying, that all new implementations of OSPFv3 are expected to include support for this feature). I do see that you have added to the Introduction: This document describes extensions to OSPFv3 to enable it to operate in these environments. But that is ambiguous. Are the "MUST"s in this document mandatory behaviour for an implementation of OSPFv3 or for an implementation of this document which is an option for OSPFv3 implementations? I don't think this is hard to write down, but I don't know what you are trying to achieve.
- [OSPF] Adrian Farrel's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [OSPF] Adrian Farrel's Discuss on draft-ietf-… Acee Lindem (acee)