Re: Ben Campbell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Wed, 04 July 2018 21:48 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E3D5130E13; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 14:48:09 -0700 (PDT)
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 TnTtGOPHv95C; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 14:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x229.google.com (mail-lj1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::229]) (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 8A442130DF5; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 14:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x229.google.com with SMTP id c11-v6so5204018lja.4; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 14:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6xG9keLzeVWeRWI0tEJa5Eo7i4ZANBdAMpEC/X9JqRc=; b=Pcn8vB098foxbg9TU5n7HWAywT3ov7GhyF7Qc1zb+m56qVt7jLgGa+XZ6aU8YhEV6+ Y8UZMd75XMQ93g4wLfoAN6XXsIsqeu2fGqMScJRjbIXQKBAczUPBVjzg4UOsI7rocmwB DOWKEPhh190dM1j1IBFhzKwDAH6SQaZ2bNVFTAIy+35G3lUQ9eWxJ6HwU02K77XmYfau Gn/bqw74zAScOLaXEw3fzo59Se9xod6kUB3xTTq4a0tpLlWESm8vVoXdoXSTxXj8x6in m6TkG+6ZCMG8xD+jpVdjfy+5wF7FAhdDtK6KJxVmx2xHwg+XZtupGxnidCp3gxdjQJHI OGoQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6xG9keLzeVWeRWI0tEJa5Eo7i4ZANBdAMpEC/X9JqRc=; b=bWuZrZUztBpqPCAXynQcDEG49Y6APzlCkJJnwrfNd7+448v8da1r8yEmmYTRax1w72 fTnrHgMo9hxgDgyZA6MmfcEzKtJo08MosWC+GzHKC92688zMH3Ni6MBbTR89YV0z7gBi WjVeQGwfbXT9eFCmRP5xTsmmHdW/XMKbY0Yl4L18yNQSAd3StPp50R1gY9JJFYXwxPLT QMewHwHJC36ckTSYFqn6bMAR/axnPwDS+tyF6I8M0L4vmAMcx6L1umZGJyjPPq//8Rrz +0VDsSx9+Eme6HYI9Gcdfaamvy2U14fN8I1qla0V085MZhtDaZgfl68n+2kihwESqy2v JAwg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0ELl0C19Fp4bXuLT04NtdMZKugXVQgENyhEufU2bHn9ieYdLdE /nQA+qKEwUeREFvH4SucWLCjmWJe6r23Au+zfv4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdbbviNZUThvcrUacJzuRm8S491yJXIVzNU49+T3DnjdkdBgPwlesC0T6IAC6SYXICkyO33ze/iCmIOV7tn2pc=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:6e0a:: with SMTP id j10-v6mr2453116ljc.61.1530740884694; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 14:48:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a2e:6e08:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 14:48:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <153058091481.16153.3959347566479523455.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <153058091481.16153.3959347566479523455.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 14:48:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmULA0CpLd2NzbcEsyVyXGbSgNTH7ANRGJh2k7usTjiiUA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Ben Campbell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail@ietf.org, Reshad Rahman <rrahman@cisco.com>, bfd-chairs@ietf.org, rtg-bfd@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000acea980570336273"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/jLbqMCJdW8GNqO0xaU3ZRZ029OU>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <rtg-bfd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-bfd/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 21:48:10 -0000

Hi Ben,
thank you for the review and your comments. Please find my answers in-line
tagged GIM>>.

Regards,
Greg

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:

> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail-09: 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-bfd-multipoint-active-tail/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This is a process discuss:
>
> If I read things correctly, this draft purports to update an _unpublished_
> RFC
> (i.e., another draft.). If so, can't we just correct that draft before
> publishing it?
>
GIM>> In the Introduction we've stated:
   This application of BFD is an extension to Multipoint BFD
   [I-D.ietf-bfd-multipoint].
I believe that the only way to avoid that is to merge the two
specifications.

>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Assuming this progresses mostly as-is, please mention the update in the
> abstract, and put a sentence or two in the introduction to give a high
> level
> summary of what the update actually is.
>
GIM>> Please consider the following updates:
Abstract
NEW TEXT:
    This document updates draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint.

Introduction
OLD TEXT:
   This application of BFD is an extension to Multipoint BFD
   [I-D.ietf-bfd-multipoint], which allows tails to notify the head of
   the lack of multipoint connectivity.  As a further option, heads can
   request a notification from the tails by means of a polling
   mechanism.  Notification to the head can be enabled for all tails, or
   for only a subset of the tails.
NEW TEXT:
   This application of BFD is an extension to Multipoint BFD
   [I-D.ietf-bfd-multipoint], which allows tails to notify the head of
   the lack of multipoint connectivity.  As a further option, heads can
   request a notification from the tails by means of a polling
   mechanism.  Notification to the head can be enabled for all tails, or
   for only a subset of the tails.  In order to achieve that, among
   several updates to [I-D.ietf-bfd-multipoint], the new state variables
   and new values for existing variables has been added.

Hope these address your comments.

Regards,
Greg