[OSPF] Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-00.txt
Acee Lindem <acee@redback.com> Fri, 06 April 2007 18:24 UTC
Return-path: <ospf-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZt6d-0005k5-Fb; Fri, 06 Apr 2007 14:24:15 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZt6c-0005k0-EZ for ospf@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2007 14:24:14 -0400
Received: from prattle.redback.com ([155.53.12.9]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZt6V-0003vS-GG for ospf@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2007 14:24:14 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by prattle.redback.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E08B2B930; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 11:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prattle.redback.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (prattle [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09076-01; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 11:24:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [?d???R?IPv6???1] (login005.redback.com [155.53.12.64]) by prattle.redback.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E85FB2B92E; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 11:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
To: OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <062F9358-17A6-4290-9568-9EBA441E51BD@redback.com>
From: Acee Lindem <acee@redback.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 14:23:22 -0400
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at redback.com
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 563af5038a5e1dade28c8affc0fff375
Cc:
Subject: [OSPF] Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-00.txt
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ospf>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1400271200=="
Errors-To: ospf-bounces@ietf.org
Lou, Alex, Igor, I have three categories of comments: Technical - For WG discussion Editorial - Text changes I think are needed Suggestions - Style comments based on my own preferences and RFC Editor guidelines. I had a conversation with them in Prague regarding style and improving document readability. See section 4 (starting on slide 47) in ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in- notes/rfc-editor/tutorial.latest.pdf Technical Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-00.txt 1. Page 6, First Paragraph - I think we should change "MUST NOT" to "MAY". Also, go ahead and make two sentenses rather than connecting them with a semicolon. A neighbor is opaque-capable if and only if it sets the O-bit in the options field of its Database Description packets. The O-bit MAY be set in the options field for other packet types its setting is not mandatory. I guess I'm not compelled to potentially render existing implementations in compatible and the "MUST NOT" begs the question of what one does if it is set in other packet types. Editorial Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-00.txt 1. Other than in the RFC boilerplate, replace "memo" with "document". Both are used in the document but, in the OSPF WG, we work on "documents" rather than "memos". 2. Page 3, section 2 - Replace "Overview" with "Introduction". If you run the id-nits script, it will point out that you have neglected to include an "introduction" in your document (not your memo :^). 3. Page 6, second paragraph - Replace "Opaque LSAs MUST placed" with "Opaque LSAs MUST be placed". 4. Page 7, third paragraph, remove the sentense "Each Database Description packet MUST have ...". This is not new for opaque LSAs. 5. Page 9, (1) - Singular/Plural problem. Replace "advertise themselves as ASBRs." with "will advertise itself as an ASBR.". 6. Page 9,(2) - Replace "(i.e., ASBR" with "(i.e., the ASBR". 7. Page 9, Section 7, second paragraph - Replace "Note, that" with "Note that". 8. Page 11, IANA Considerations - Add: There are no changes to the IANA number assignment requirements from RFC 2370 [RFC2370]. If you don't, I can almost guarentee that they'll ask. 9. Page 13, Section 12.1, second paragraph - Replace s "not to forward certain" with not to flood certain". 10. Page 15, third bullect - Replace "MUST NOTE" with "MUST NOT". Suggestions based on RFC Editor Guidelines 1. Consistent with RFC Editor guidelines. Replace "types 9, 10 and 11" with "types 9, 10, and 11". 2. Page 6, Section 3.2 - Replace "Summary LSAs and types 9 and 10" with "Summary LSAs, type-9 opaque LSAs, and type-10 opaque LSAs". 3. Throughout - Replace Hello packets, Database Description packets and" with "Hello packets, Database Description packets, and". 4. Page 7, Protocol Data Structues - Replace "uses only, and" with "uses only. They" There is a tendency for OSPF documents to string independent clauses together with ", and". I'd like to reverse this trend. 5. Page 8, section 4.1, Neighbor Options - Replace "packets, and" with "packets. It" or "packets and". 6. Page 8, section 5, first paragraph - Replace "applications, and" with "applications and". At least that is the way I read it. 7. Page 8, section 5, second paragraphs - Split into more than one sentense to improve readability. Type-9 opaque LSAs and type-10 opaque LSAs do not have this problem since the receiving router can detect whether or not the advertising router is reachable within the LSA's respective flooding scope. In the case of type-9 LSAs, the originating router must be an OSPF neighbor in Exchange state or greater. In the case of type-10 Opaque LSAs, the intra- area SPF calculation will determine the advertising router's reachability. 8. Page 9, first sentense - Replace "neither are AS scoped ...." with "AS scoped opaque LSAs are not flooded into these area types.". 9. Page 9, Section 6, - Replace "ospfOriginateNewLsas" with "ospfOriginateNewLsas,". 10. Page 14, section 12.2 - Replace "future extensibility of OSPF" with "future OSPF extensibility". 11. Page 14, figure - Replace "9, 10 or 11 " with "9, 10, or 11". 12. Page 15, second bullet - Replace "the area that they are originated into" with "their area of origin". Thanks, Acee
_______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
- [OSPF] Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-00.… Acee Lindem
- [OSPF] Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-00.… Acee Lindem
- [OSPF] Re: Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis… Lou Berger
- [OSPF] Re: Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis… Acee Lindem
- [OSPF] Re: Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis… Lou Berger
- [OSPF] Re: Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis… Acee Lindem