[Pals] Alia Atlas' Yes on draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal-05: (with COMMENT)

["Alia Atlas" <[e-mail]>]

Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal-05: Yes

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-vccv-for-gal/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

1) In the last paragraph of Section 3: " Note that the inclusion of a GAL
following the PW LSE over a label
   switched path subject to Equal-Cost Multi-path (ECMP) load balancing
   can cause the OAM packet to take a different path through the network
   from the corresponding PW data packets.  If that is not acceptable,
   then an alternative VCCV type needs to be used."

Since the GAL is a Reserved label, it should not be included in a hash
done for load-balancing.  This is
described in RFC 7325 Sec 2.4.5.1 bullet 3 " Special-purpose labels
(label values 0-15) MUST NOT be used. 
Extended special-purpose labels (any label following label 15) MUST NOT
be used.  In particular, GAL and 
RA MUST NOT be used so that OAM traffic follows the same path as payload
packets with the same label stack."

Please correct the paragraph to add this reference.  I know that there
may be old implementations out
there that do the wrong thing - but an RFC should refer to the correct
behavior.

The sentence in Section 7 " Attention is drawn to the possible absence of
fate sharing between PW
   data packets and VCCV CC Type 4 packets described in Section 3 and
   Section 4." will also need updating.

2)  The use of LSE as an unintroduced abbreviation is slightly confusing.
 Can you please expand it the first time
to Label Stack Entry?