Re: [OSPF] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-14: (with COMMENT)
Shraddha Hegde <shraddha@juniper.net> Wed, 31 January 2018 04:34 UTC
Return-Path: <shraddha@juniper.net>
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 5FABC13151C; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 20:34:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 qFfw5fAN-TQg; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 20:34:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com [208.84.65.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 836C0131505; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 20:34:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108156.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w0V4YSY3030382; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 20:34:38 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=93wxXrybXz2KarmSKCInu74QsWsGxn5ZHZIl+qfCki8=; b=G+SIkdOf3R4Gy+0nNthz9uI+WQwElhAm6gHvMvErWgFRA1AvTn1/GOhEcV1iTsNnOiUF SpgIa65/o7ZeEwrLwF1U+R2NQdTfD1j2wS0oIK+4zGFMUhOhM8xZYHxF/9D9jc1fnfQv 1+a1Fsty3CeWwqDrIaR2QjS7DbMZuswhNj8JEl/RxWVMGNH41JghAoXQvbuBUlU43QgF S5skYGo+PFq3j0sfAkd9j9oHYb47VWcMH4SVNNh3yjaNR+iRJ8hcrYT8w0I8Vl4kCZtk 1S9G9A5s1DgJ5zhbtejKF7+uizmpwwonOJ8iq/Y4nrUpK1zADBrYbDbWJiavNOx4F7Xl sQ==
Received: from nam03-dm3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm3nam03lp0015.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.15]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2fu5f2r7nx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 30 Jan 2018 20:34:38 -0800
Received: from BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.167.2.135) by BN3PR05MB2660.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.166.72.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.464.6; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 04:34:36 +0000
Received: from BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.167.2.135]) by BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.167.2.135]) with mapi id 15.20.0464.012; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 04:34:36 +0000
From: Shraddha Hegde <shraddha@juniper.net>
To: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload@ietf.org>, Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>, "ospf-chairs@ietf.org" <ospf-chairs@ietf.org>, "acee@cisco.com" <acee@cisco.com>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>, "tim.chown@jisc.ac.uk" <tim.chown@jisc.ac.uk>
Thread-Topic: Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-14: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHTldtwnu5S0iMcoEq+rw1XiY0N1KONbbZA
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 04:34:36 +0000
Message-ID: <BN3PR05MB2706DEA05BB0C7CD4BD921A6D5FB0@BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <151688478020.31298.16642730494895771972.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <151688478020.31298.16642730494895771972.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [122.167.239.23]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN3PR05MB2660; 7:GGTWj7KmSh2r/V15aoR0GtNkPN1X+G/EOZXzRc2ubQsUSeZBNUbF5n/cM4b7g3qUiHomtAOQ0yy0PCI+qDr9KfTJMPdAFYVgPz5Twhdg5RdEu5nXDx4LFzQjo98q/V7SsuqanID3AfRgshziedXuu5+QB0AlhbFPI7c6IDlMx3kEjkPcwNhyIusJ4UosSNz4s63h8Hsj5vPw40Q7FxvvShzLjaoMJZRUz8SLpIUMAzTiNzT5geK/TaoV72s2Y2Z+
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 641c90c3-bda3-4f04-aef8-08d56863eee5
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(48565401081)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:BN3PR05MB2660;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN3PR05MB2660:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN3PR05MB26607D28EA4FF36680D05E6DD5FB0@BN3PR05MB2660.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(274715658323672)(10436049006162)(95692535739014);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040501)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(93006095)(93001095)(3002001)(3231101)(2400082)(944501161)(10201501046)(6055026)(6041288)(20161123560045)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123562045)(20161123558120)(20161123564045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:BN3PR05MB2660; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN3PR05MB2660;
x-forefront-prvs: 056929CBB8
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(396003)(39860400002)(366004)(39380400002)(346002)(376002)(13464003)(51914003)(189003)(199004)(3280700002)(33656002)(305945005)(7696005)(6246003)(76176011)(966005)(66066001)(14454004)(4326008)(53546011)(106356001)(59450400001)(102836004)(2900100001)(99286004)(54906003)(316002)(110136005)(3660700001)(6506007)(5660300001)(97736004)(8936002)(81166006)(105586002)(25786009)(81156014)(68736007)(8676002)(478600001)(26005)(53936002)(3846002)(6116002)(6306002)(6436002)(77096007)(9686003)(55016002)(186003)(2906002)(86362001)(229853002)(7736002)(74316002)(575784001)(2950100002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN3PR05MB2660; H:BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: OYKdFvc9DFt8j9jNPgvcpzB6qecfNHPg0RF1NUlzyWDjpiwAFnWd6QwqbF132ciWuyquM7l8/x4iBCZhqthi9A==
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 641c90c3-bda3-4f04-aef8-08d56863eee5
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 31 Jan 2018 04:34:36.1249 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN3PR05MB2660
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-01-31_01:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1801310058
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/lLzCfHG7_SPye-TSt1enk-bUAks>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-14: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 04:34:44 -0000
Thanks for the review Benoit. I have addressed Tim's comments in -15 version. Will post it soon. Thanks Shraddha -----Original Message----- From: Benoit Claise [mailto:bclaise@cisco.com] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 6:23 PM To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org> Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload@ietf.org; Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>; ospf-chairs@ietf.org; acee@cisco.com; ospf@ietf.org; tim.chown@jisc.ac.uk Subject: Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-14: (with COMMENT) Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-14: No Objection 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 https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_iesg_statement_discuss-2Dcriteria.html&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=NyjLsr7JA7mvpCJa0YmPdVKcmMXJ31bpbBaNqzCNrng&m=u9tJ1yVc0IA5x8YKUYmU-C7jQHyJB-5jBZMJL972g54&s=hOCo1D4SsPJ_YaJnjleDIcqoN0CgrQIjm6HkrwwBpHk&e= for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dospf-2Dlink-2Doverload_&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=NyjLsr7JA7mvpCJa0YmPdVKcmMXJ31bpbBaNqzCNrng&m=u9tJ1yVc0IA5x8YKUYmU-C7jQHyJB-5jBZMJL972g54&s=ujWgF5xik7lwV-N51a0mFcuf6Q7JRXz3ID1DkU2rVmY&e= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- As mentioned by Tim, part of the OPS DIR review. It's the authors and responsible AD to decide whether to act on those comments. I believe the document is Ready for publication. I have only three minor comments below, which the authors may choose to act on. Overall the document reads reasonably well. Not being overly familiar with the material, I needed to read it through end-to-end more than once to better understand its scope and intent. My first comment would be that perhaps the introduction section could be better written; the abstract seemed clear on the purpose of the draft, while the introduction felt a little muddled. Sections 2, 3 and 4, which detail the motivations and extensions, were much clearer. Secondly, there are some minor typographic errors throughout the document, generally missing (in)definite articles. While the RFC Editor would pick these up, it would be nice for the authors to have a final pass and fix those before submission. Thirdly, the document does not give any advice on the timing of using the extensions - how far in advance is it recommended to use the extensions? - or on the return to 'normal' state once the maintenance is completed. So perhaps consider adding a short section on this, maybe in Section 5.
- [OSPF] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf… Benoit Claise
- Re: [OSPF] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-… Shraddha Hegde