Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5306bis

["Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <[e-mail]>]

THanx Manav.

V1 of the draft has been posted addressing your comment.

   Les

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Manav Bhatia <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2018 3:22 PM
> To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; draft-ietf-lsr-isis-
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5306bis
> 
> Hi Les,
> 
> That should help.
> 
> Cheers, Manav
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 10:28 PM Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > (draft alias corrected)
> >
> >
> >
> > Manav –
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanx for the review.
> >
> >
> >
> > I think your comment is on the mark – though implementers  have been
> known to bypass the existing limitation by signaling a long holdtime prior to
> restart even in the absence of PR bit. Suppose we added the following text
> at the end of Section 2.2.3:
> >
> >
> >
> > “Use of the PR bit provides a means to safely  support restart periods which
> are significantly longer than standard holdtimes.”
> >
> >
> >
> > ??
> >
> >
> >
> >    Les
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: rtg-dir <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Manav Bhatia
> > Sent: Friday, December 07, 2018 2:45 AM
> > To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; draft-ietf--lsr-isis-
> [e-mail]
> > Subject: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5306bis
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > I have done a routing directorate review of this draft.
> >
> >
> >
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5306bis/
> >
> >
> >
> > 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-lsr-isis-rfc5306bis
> >
> > Reviewer: Manav Bhatia
> >
> > Review Date: 7 Dec 2018
> >
> > Intended Status: Proposed Standard
> >
> >
> >
> > Summary:
> >
> > No issues found. This document is ready for publication.
> >
> >
> >
> > Comments:
> >
> > I have a minor comment on whether the authors could add some text that
> explains that the current mechanism only works when the restarting router
> comes up in a short amount of time, which is basically for as long as the
> Holdtimer does not expire on its neighbors. However, some restarts can take
> longer, and this adds support for such restarts.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks, Manav