Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Wed, 26 May 2021 08:37 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A67E23A2660; Wed, 26 May 2021 01:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 f7ILyXkyckSa; Wed, 26 May 2021 01:37:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 885273A25D1; Wed, 26 May 2021 01:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.7] (c83-250-136-37.bredband.tele2.se [83.250.136.37]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 914493484AC; Wed, 26 May 2021 10:37:10 +0200 (CEST)
To: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>, "julien.meuric@orange.com" <julien.meuric@orange.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>
References: <eeea136e-cd42-28b2-1669-07b82b460410@orange.com> <033c24b000d84708857cca866b5ad559@huawei.com>
Cc: draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync@ietf.org
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <df697a0c-7028-8ca5-b31d-ab2ab7f2abcb@pi.nu>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 10:37:10 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <033c24b000d84708857cca866b5ad559@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/Wo6M-_xBgfQbahTNxN7N1nVyZFE>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Adoption of draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 08:37:23 -0000

WG, authors,

I agree with Mach on both accounts

- the document is ready for wg adoption
- something has to be done about the abstract

I thought that there were a guideline that abstracts should be no more 
than 20 lines, counting Header and blank lines this is 31. But as Mach 
it is the level of detail that should be lifted a bit.

I think we normally don't place the "Requirement Language"  as part of 
the abstract or close to it. I seen it placed as a subsection to the 
Introductiuon or an independent section after the Introduction.

That said - and if the authors agree - I don't think it is strictly 
necessary to update this prior to accepting the document as a wg 
document, but could be done as part as the working group processing the 
document to Publication Request.

/Loa

On 26/05/2021 08:25, Mach Chen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have read the document, and support the adoption.
> 
> One quick comments about the abstract section, it seems too details, it's better to more some of the content to the Introduction section.
> 
> Best regards,
> Mach
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> julien.meuric@orange.com
>> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 9:41 PM
>> To: pce@ietf.org
>> Subject: [Pce] Adoption of draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> The document draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync has reached the head of our
>> adoption queue
>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-litkowski-pce-state-sync/).
>>
>> Do you consider this I-D is a good foundation for a WG item? Please share your
>> feedback using the PCE mailing list by May 31.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dhruv & Julien
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> Pce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
> 

-- 

Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
Senior MPLS Expert                          loa.pi.nu@gmail.com
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64