Re: [pim] WGLC for draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang-04

"Holland, Jake" <jholland@akamai.com> Wed, 05 September 2018 03:49 UTC

Return-Path: <jholland@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B7DB127B92 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 20:49:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.711
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.711 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, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 OFOVcuQyTjN9 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 20:49:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 A4EEA12785F for <pim@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 20:49:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0122332.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w853mHv5031508 for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 04:49:11 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=gUidA8m4jZByvEzxTwgRGYjuQ568UFzHlOVUU//Y9rY=; b=MlIe27FP8wwWu5z4bDOWby6xaPRiJeSI7i9dgZ4Tw/ZDNG3Nz/hG6sjeF6Jq9Lac4AL9 jjLaDL0qawrolrAdZEg9X4T3GWyWLtwfIlnEIoOkpfQpkD7UAWTuiegCmFcUrq8ICgTp /oJIPyFNADWuqVnhCobytU9yiRnDXJlB+r2D8bcB9mK0KGJOGBBX9fKGiMm0kUUtyYWI AfKCmlhxeMiq7MFPOcnGrBSJ8rAZc+DyQIzHUq4N4rp804PBjD//PcjqGa64ibHtZg+s NJblaAYBk3pbNCMd3iNx2Mux1KavD+SkaBOMm4GzvKCkEM02ofXdiEnhNAwSJfygKwpd Fg==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint2 (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [184.51.33.19]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2m7jtedt42-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Sep 2018 04:49:11 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id w853YjtQ007119 for <pim@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 23:49:10 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.32]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2m7p4ak3kj-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <pim@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Sep 2018 23:49:09 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.104) by usma1ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1365.1; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 23:49:09 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB4.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.104]) by usma1ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.104]) with mapi id 15.00.1365.000; Tue, 4 Sep 2018 23:49:09 -0400
From: "Holland, Jake" <jholland@akamai.com>
To: "pim@ietf.org" <pim@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [pim] WGLC for draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang-04
Thread-Index: AQHUPmFYKwQ5v99qN0WUBa5LnQ78ZKTg572A
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 03:49:08 +0000
Message-ID: <0EA79DA9-F693-45C2-8B1C-E0BDE4648DD9@akamai.com>
References: <CAHANBtJYjqaa5GP=0kybwLtUBNG+Kafg8NEz2VxVhF13bgMKzw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHANBtJYjqaa5GP=0kybwLtUBNG+Kafg8NEz2VxVhF13bgMKzw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.0.180812
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.112.124]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <BC49DF642A193C47B755A25B9E336539@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-09-05_01:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1809050037
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-09-05_01:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default 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=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1809050039
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/6dgzy16sdOm4A8EfnLzFu5sGLSo>
Subject: Re: [pim] WGLC for draft-ietf-pim-msdp-yang-04
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast <pim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pim/>
List-Post: <mailto:pim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 03:49:13 -0000

Hi Sandy,

Thanks for working on this. I read through it, and I saw a few points I thought I should mention.

1.
I noticed that this is Standards Track, but it has normative references to MSDP (RFC 3168), which is Experimental.

I remember seeing in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4611#section-1.1 that a variance was required for a similar downref.

If I understand the process in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-9.1 correctly, we'd either need this document to be Experimental instead of Standards Track, or we'd need to justify a similar variance.

So I suggest making this doc Experimental.

2.
I noticed the filter acls were strings, but there's no definition of the format or meaning of the strings, that I saw.

Maybe the filters should use the acl-base type from https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-19#section-4.1 ?

Either that or define the semantics of the strings in the acls, and how they filter.

3.
I also saw a few nits:
- section 6 is just: " No notification is defined in this model."
Maybe it's better to remove the section?

- section 3 I think there's a grammar error. Suggestion:
OLD:
The filter features allow operators to avoid some SA information be forwarded to some peers.
NEW:
The filter features selectively allow operators to prevent SA information from being forwarded to peers.

- section 5 I think there's a missing word. Suggestion:
OLD:
The part is used to define some useful and ordinary operations
NEW:
The RPC part is used to define some useful and ordinary operations


I have no other objections, I think it looks ok overall, as far as I can tell.

Kind regards,
Jake

´╗┐On 2018-08-27, 16:54, "Stig Venaas" <stig@venaas.com> wrote:

    Hi
    
    This is the second WGLC for this document. There was no feedback
    during the first last call in February, but the document has been
    revised and improved since then. Mike and I believe it is time for
    another last call.
    
    Please respond by September 10th whether you believe it is ready for
    publication, and what issues you may have with the document.
    
    Thanks,
    Stig
    
    _______________________________________________
    pim mailing list
    pim@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim