Re: [Pce] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-10.txt
"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Tue, 19 February 2019 12:57 UTC
Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.com>
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 68538130F50; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:57:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=gmail.com
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 NHUN1TE2eYXH; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:57:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk1-x730.google.com (mail-qk1-x730.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::730]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22B58130EE6; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:57:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk1-x730.google.com with SMTP id p15so11921447qkl.5; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:57:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=w18lt5Ti7XYVxYFnkXCLA2YVEdJOaohL3v2sGEqdSmM=; b=PRylEculHqe/2iLln7m1h9ZdNrZwV7rnHGlHB15+z8nJcbxQ/Yx5NkxMnW4b5PKb4l W0lF9vD37/Kf2v5RQHNheNP8dRTTFZfH+InglGhcBpmJnGO2xb3yj0HepwDGpB2sn8x5 arsQrDGdwCnCdF4cs4dagg2xd+ev2+jrf+f96vJL0D4GCcxGsQF27OXCJmdtQIflv5/v 5Iai3WgyJ4zdA2oZsH0g9den4242tbsqpExHx0O5TbFYK6XuUQgXcbTWLJ3QCoTKXOdO Cm+CZSRUbFllpo37nS2vJVi81Y+vB/DxxoNN0ryM71QGQEsJTOJ6dhNMpd/TTPMCp2fh qDhw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=w18lt5Ti7XYVxYFnkXCLA2YVEdJOaohL3v2sGEqdSmM=; b=c1xtBirey9CLWbAvWw90xDTOKN97mVG0Wh2RPb5rZcokT/uNNeDdEAhsx5YQUmhGU2 U6QpSuNAZO5eJD/Q1ayB6NEm0CU1z9F2o5MXGr1UjFTc7fM0yVl+XS2JhFFEqn7wEOm6 jfszcRQvyZzdXyzYF4kzLMHFxNn1PZYKA5PPJ382HvIEhiA1HlcC/gL0LPXWzhH2HxJb D7aV3IzShhuJpDF6cTbdEX+1bbwEebCQ9LfPNd6kLkQBHjLt7RmAq7Iu4or/3o67lOOH 7eNSkQQS9U+cwY0PUaQeD74wJ43taYPMioAgQHFw4tzPOIFatODv3hbNvz22ZyLAgFw5 9Kpw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuaeDaT3XeCM2wIZC/3csya0xMBp7K66jxzoKJGxuWLIPF377Kth PlTNj5UJhpkNr2/vJfuMjHizmbXZKvNUFbBz6UE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IativZYyGAAK0q5auM8b73SCZzZR1ouBAVyQbyga2bsYyCuS3Ev1bN/+0/U2UBe/ya2N0e3aqv8xmWRGBEcygA=
X-Received: by 2002:ae9:c308:: with SMTP id n8mr19584897qkg.10.1550581051880; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 04:57:31 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAA=duU0tv-q5BRg3nudfnao-DYwf2YVLcERGZBvjp+X2tBv38A@mail.gmail.com> <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9B8D9532D7@BLREML503-MBX.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9B8D9532D7@BLREML503-MBX.china.huawei.com>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 07:57:20 -0500
Message-ID: <CAA=duU0_mbAbx=yjAJJ-BWtgyAqqhNC=fX7=ik_noAu8KKxkNQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>
Cc: "<rtg-ads@ietf.org>" <rtg-ads@ietf.org>, "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp.all@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="000000000000cb1c5f05823ec801"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/f6ir2Pswyf1iB6gxy4z_krYFdOU>
Subject: Re: [Pce] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-10.txt
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: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 12:57:44 -0000
Dhruv, That was quick! :-) All looks good except you missed two comments: 8. Section 6.5, first paragraph: In the second line, replace the comma with a period and capitalize the following "this". 9. Section 6.5, last paragraph: A right ")" is missing at the end of the paragraph. Thanks, Andy On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:15 AM Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com> wrote: > Hi Andy, > > > > Thanks for your review. Your comments are incorporated in the -11 version. > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp/ > > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-11 > > > > Regards, > > Dhruv > > > > > > > > Dhruv Dhody > > Lead Architect > > Network Business Line > > Huawei Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. > > Survey No. 37, Next to EPIP Area, Kundalahalli, Whitefield > > Bengaluru, Karnataka - 560066 > > Tel: + 91-80-49160700 Ext 71583 II Email: dhruv.dhody@huawei.com > > [image: Huawei-small] > > This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from > HUAWEI, which > is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. > Any use of the > information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, > total or partial > disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the > intended > recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please > notify the sender by > phone or email immediately and delete it! > > > > *From:* Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew G. Malis > *Sent:* 19 February 2019 02:34 > *To:* <rtg-ads@ietf.org> <rtg-ads@ietf.org> > *Cc:* rtg-dir@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org; > draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp.all@ietf.org > *Subject:* [Pce] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-10.txt > > > > Hello, > > I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. > The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related > drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes > on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to > the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please > see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir > > Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it > would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last > Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through > discussion or by updating the draft. > > Document: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-10.txt > Reviewer: Andy Malis > Review Date: 18 February 2019 > IETF LC End Date: N/A (in preparation for IETF LC) > Intended Status: Standards Track > > Summary: > > This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should > be considered prior to publication. > > Comments: > > It was very easy to follow the draft. Excellent work by all involved. > > Major issues: > > No major issues found. > > Minor Issues: > > No minor issues found. > > Nits: > > 1. Section 3..1, second paragraph: > > Replace: > For P2MP this is an added advantage, where the size of message is much > larger. > > With: > For P2MP, where the size of message is much larger, this is an added > advantage. > > 2. Section 5.1, fifth paragraph: > > Replace: > Path Computation LSP Initiate Message (PCInitiate): is a PCEP > > With: > Path Computation LSP Initiate Message (PCInitiate): PCInitiate is a PCEP > > 3. Section 5.2, first paragraph: > > Replace: > PCEP speakers advertise Stateful capability via STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY > TLV in open message. > > With: > PCEP speakers advertise Stateful capability via the > STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY TLV in the OPEN object. > > 4. Section 5.2, third paragraph (N Flag): In two places, replace "changes" > with "change". > > 5.. Section 5.3, first paragraph: Expand "LSR" (Label Switching Router) on > first use. It's not on the RFC Editor's list of well-known acronyms. > > 6. Section 5.3, second paragraph: Expand "PCED" (PCE Discovery TLV) on > first use. > > 7. Section 6.2, last paragraph: A right ")" is missing at the end of the > paragraph. > > 8. Section 6.5, first paragraph: In the second line, replace the comma > with a period and capitalize the following "this". > > 9. Section 6.5, last paragraph: A right ")" is missing at the end of the > paragraph. > > 10. Section 8, second paragraph: Add the word "The" to the start of the > paragraph. > > 11. Section 11.2, first paragraph. Change "and a registry was created" to > "and the STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY TLV Flag Field subregistry was created" > > 12. Section 11.3, first paragraph: Change "and a registry was created" to > "and the LSP Object Flag Field subregistry was created" > > Regards, > Andy > > >
- [Pce] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [Pce] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Pce] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Pce] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [Pce] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-… Dhruv Dhody