Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84720128BB6 for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 19:53:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 RhDFroVPxh2H for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 19:53:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22c.google.com (mail-oi0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43B19128A32 for ; Mon, 8 May 2017 19:53:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id w10so72673207oif.0 for ; Mon, 08 May 2017 19:53:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=GyfY9TG2FzEBOGDrodozm3pA6Suk8BpA/dt9b/lIZZ4=; b=cksz3ppBcy/N71FuqVDI+FVSiDXqOFqy1/P466a4cpF/b7ff5ywHlR/fMwcBq6mQXi fGXVgTQXUgCKRlb5kHzjRGrXJqSyutt+pr7/rRqjarfoMM13RxFOTRRbStPOS5xIQVZZ jSaAC/KU1mVKpm9kMHJFsbfqHlHBPCPKfVF9LHIpMJuCyeK4KZ0j10iixdxMwdi5F3I1 UDGDvALAyYVUppSsHyyboluaJl3WSY6xXZYZh6pnPRwmbfub7ZRWdI8nySy0UZEfR67m V2O7vCEzHOngpIhs7Yuz/UVRZJ7szCMDWmQbtPP1mLxpDRMvsOYiOhEoeGuIYemlzk/g E0aA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GyfY9TG2FzEBOGDrodozm3pA6Suk8BpA/dt9b/lIZZ4=; b=NmJxiNEHs3P5ty1o7rEA5c69CppBcsOOnY1pCIu2PFGFEXaAEG1clEG6WLoxKipo8x PT9kA+JLCQtw+lSTDmYK0cPIPyyehavke6k+s7xRMaSAE/iDWZF0M+F6oBPylLxzbNSp hjbKYrVZZT50iJA4sIB1JMmytWIJcNYUePFq5h4I0dQZ7vGAamuE1aRcF8qmlH9YFIGm EQmRUj50aqOjOvPNXQ3Az7J8+cXssRLvteJHB2qrzwV7ayZMObXOQLEDvOmPVzY7ds0l 59i0qlm5wrI+wxS7EbBVWsMO3DlQijwEUyH10ee+8zS/rSK8egaxOyEaSGsREQz3XtWY dTVQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/7kE8Jb/TNZU0nNboqs2XgNQcAe6VTpo6lYnv8UaYUn8Gg2ZW0l nEIUh33pUDAmeUb6vGFctDABbjVbAg== X-Received: by 10.202.97.85 with SMTP id v82mr22431407oib.214.1494298423638; Mon, 08 May 2017 19:53:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.157.52.246 with HTTP; Mon, 8 May 2017 19:53:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE2BB9C4A3@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com> References: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE2BB9C4A3@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com> From: Greg Mirsky Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 19:53:43 -0700 Message-ID: To: Xuxiaohu Cc: "Acee Lindem (acee)" , OSPF WG List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d45f4babf4c054f0e7649 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [OSPF] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiAgQWR2ZXJ0aXNpbmcgVHVubmVsaW5nIENh?= =?utf-8?q?pability_in_OSPF_=28draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-02=29?= X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 02:53:46 -0000 --001a113d45f4babf4c054f0e7649 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Xiaohu, thank you for your most expedient response and kind consideration of my comments. I've just noticed typo in my own proposal s/There my/There may/. And just one more question, why you propose to use SHOULD in "... the first occurrence SHOULD be processed ..." Would MUST be more appropriate here? Or you envision that in some circumstances this policy may be changed? Regards, Greg On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Xuxiaohu wrote: > Hi Greg, > > > > Thanks for your support and your comments. Please see my response inline. > > > > *=E5=8F=91=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA:* OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] *=E4= =BB=A3=E8=A1=A8 *Greg Mirsky > *=E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E6=97=B6=E9=97=B4:* 2017=E5=B9=B45=E6=9C=889=E6=97=A5= 5:49 > *=E6=94=B6=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA:* Acee Lindem (acee) > *=E6=8A=84=E9=80=81:* OSPF WG List > *=E4=B8=BB=E9=A2=98:* Re: [OSPF] Advertising Tunneling Capability in OSPF > (draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-02) > > > > Dear All, > > yes/support (readability needs some work) > > > > Couple nits: > > - Introduction. > > > - Perhaps "Some networks use tunnels for a variety of reasons, such > as:" may be re-worded as "There my be number of reasons why differe= nt types > of tunneling technique has been used in networks, among these are:" > > [Xiaohu] Will update it. > > - "The ingress needs to select a type of tunnel which is supported by > the egress." I think that the idea is to find match between set of = tunnels > supported by the ingress and the egress. > > [Xiaohu] Yes. Will add more words to clarify it. > > - Section 3 > > > - s/Routers advertises/Routers advertise/ > - It is stated that "The Encapsulation Capability TLV SHOULD NOT > appear more than once within a given OSPF Router Information (RI) O= paque > LSA." What happens when it does appear more than once? Discard LSA?= TLV? > > [Xiaohu] Thanks for pointing out this. How about adding the following tex= t for clarification =E2=80=9CIf the Encapsulation Capability TLV appears mo= re than once in an OSPF Router Information LSA, only the first occurrence S= HOULD be processed and others MUST be ignored.=E2=80=9D > > Best regards, > > Xiaohu > > Regards, > > Greg > > > > > > > > *From: *OSPF on behalf of "Acee Lindem (acee)" < > acee@cisco.com> > *Date: *Thursday, April 27, 2017 at 07:45 > *To: *"ospf@ietf.org" > *Subject: *[OSPF] Advertising Tunneling Capability in OSPF > (draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-02) > > > > This begins the WG last call for the subject draft. Please send your > support and/or > > comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, May 12th, 2017. > > > > For your convenience, here is the URL for the subject document. > > > > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-02.txt > > > > Thanks, > > Acee > > > > _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > > > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > > > --001a113d45f4babf4c054f0e7649 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Xiaohu,
thank you for your most expedient response = and kind consideration of my comments.
I've just noticed typo= in my own proposal s/There my/There may/.=
And just one more questi= on, why you propose to use SHOULD in "...=C2=A0the first occurrence SHOULD be processed ..." Would MUST= be more appropriate here? Or you envision that in some circumstances this policy may= be changed?
Regards,
Greg

On Mon, = May 8, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com> wro= te:

Hi Greg,

=C2= =A0

Thanks for= your support and your comments. Please see my response inline.

=C2= =A0

=E5=8F=91=E4=BB= =B6=E4=BA=BA: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] =E4=BB=A3=E8=A1=A8 Greg Mirsky
=E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E6=97=B6=E9= =97=B4: 2017=E5=B9=B45=E6=9C=889=E6=97=A5<= span lang=3D"EN-US"> 5:49
=E6=94=B6=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: Acee Lindem (acee)
=E6=8A=84=E9=80=81: OSPF WG List
=E4=B8=BB=E9=A2=98: Re: [OSPF] Advertising Tunneling Capability in OSPF (draft-ietf-osp= f-encapsulation-cap-02)

=C2=A0

Dear All,<= /p>

yes/support (readability needs = some work)

=C2=A0

Couple nits:

  • Introduction.=C2=A0
    • Perhaps "Some networks use tunnels for a variety = of reasons, such as:" may be re-worded as "There my be number of = reasons why different types of tunneling technique has been used in network= s, among these are:"

[Xiaohu] W= ill update it.

    • "The ingress needs to select a type of tunnel whi= ch is supported by the egress." I think that the idea is to find match= between set of tunnels supported by the ingress and the egress.<= /u>

[Xiaohu] Y= es. Will add more words to clarify it.

  • Section 3
    • s/Routers advertises/Routers advertise/<= /span>
    • It is stated that "The Encapsulation Capability T= LV SHOULD NOT appear more than once within a given OSPF Router Information = (RI) Opaque LSA." What happens when it does appear more than once? Dis= card LSA? TLV?
[Xiaohu] Thanks for pointing out this. How about adding the followin=
g text for clarification =E2=80=9CIf the Encapsulation Capability TLV appea=
rs more than once in an OSPF Router Information LSA, only the first occurre=
nce SHOULD be processed and others MUST be ignored.=E2=80=9D<=
/span>

Best regar= ds,

Xiaohu<= /u>

Regards,

Greg

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

From: OSPF <ospf-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of "= ;Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
Date: Thursday, April 27, 2017 at 07:45
To: "ospf@ie= tf.org" <osp= f@ietf.org>
Subject: [OSPF] Advertis= ing Tunneling Capability in OSPF (draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-02= )

=C2=A0

This begins the WG last call for the subject draft. Please send = your =C2=A0support and/or=C2=A0

comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, May 12th, 2017.=C2= =A0

=C2=A0

For your convenience, here is the URL for the subject document.= =C2=A0

=C2=A0

=C2=A0

Thanks,

Acee=C2=A0

=C2=A0<= u>

_______________________________________________ O= SPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

=
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

=C2=A0


--001a113d45f4babf4c054f0e7649--