[RTG-DIR] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-term-07

Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com> Fri, 02 February 2018 21:27 UTC

Return-Path: <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietf.org
Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC8F312025C; Fri, 2 Feb 2018 13:27:20 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
To: <rtg-dir@ietf.org>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, bmwg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-term.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.71.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <151760684081.17028.12836598632315025128@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2018 13:27:20 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/7nAIItTu0SnlZIsUBUottajlbC4>
Subject: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-term-07
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: Routing Area Directorate <rtg-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-dir/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2018 21:27:21 -0000

Reviewer: Ines Robles
Review result: Has Nits

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-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-term-07
Reviewer: Ines Robles
Review Date: 02-02-2018
Intended status: Informational

Summary:
I have some minor concerns about this document that I think should be resolved
before publication.

Comments:

I believe the draft is technically good. This document is well written and
clear to understand. The figures are clear and helpful.

Major Issues:

No major issues found.

Minor Issues:

-There is a definition of Northbound Interface (NI) in section 2.1.2, but there
is no a definition for Southbound Interface(SI). A definition for SI, was
available in the version 00 of this document [1], but deleted in further
versions. There is a reason for that? I think it would be nice to have a
definition for SI, or a pointer to one such as for NI.

- In section 2.1.2 in the Discussion, where it states: "...and orchestration
systems to program...", I think it would be nice to add an example, "...and
orchestration systems such as [add example here] to program..."

- In section 2.1.8 you mention Cluster/Redundancy Mode.
  Does it include a "Distributed Controller" mode/function, like e.g. mentioned
  in [2]?

- Section 2.3.2.2 in the Definition paragraph: "...(number of nodes, links and
hosts)..." it seems to me like the hosts are not considered nodes in here?. Is
that correct?

Nits:

Section 2.1.2: is same Service... => is same as the Service...
Section 2.3.1.4: in the Definition paragraph: "at it Southbound..." => "at its
Southbound..." Section 2.3.1.5: in the Definition paragraph: "at it
Southbound..." => "at its Southbound..." Section 4: The test coverage table
  -In the column 1, file 1: there is an empty space, maybe it would be nice to
  add a description for that column like "Stage" or something like that. What
  do you think? -In the Speed column, in the Setup stage: 1- Network Topology
  Discovery => Network Topology Discovery time. -In the Reliability column, in
  the Operational stage: 2- Exception Handling Detection Time => Exception
  Handling

Thanks for this document,

Best Regards,

Ines.

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-term-00
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/96/materials/slides-96-sdnrg-11/