Re: [Pals] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-pals-mc-pon-04: (with DISCUSS)

[Jiangyuanlong <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alexey,

1) For this protocol version (001), no Optional Sub-TLV is defined yet, thus the field does not exist on the wire. This field is intended to give a guideline on future protocol extensions, but there is no details of sub-TLVs format yet, and we would like to defer the format and how to process it to future versions of the protocol.

2) System Priority is a 2-octets value assigned by management or administration policy, the OLT with the numerically lower value of System Priority has the higher priority. We will clarify it in the next revision.

Thanks,
Yuanlong

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 2:57 PM
To: The IESG
Cc: [e-mail]; Andrew G. Malis; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-pals-mc-pon-04: (with DISCUSS)

Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pals-mc-pon-04: 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 https://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:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-mc-pon/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a couple of minor blocking points I would like to discuss, but they should be easy to fix:

1) In 2.1.1 and other sub-sections: should sub-TLV format be defined now, even though you don't specify any sub-TLV? (or is it already specified in another document?) Should recipients ignore unrecognized sub-TLVs or do something else? Please clarify.

2) In 2.1.3: what is "system priority"? This is not explained. Please either add an explanation or a reference to a document that defines it.