IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te-02

Alvaro Retana <alvaro.retana@huawei.com> Thu, 03 May 2018 19:10 UTC

Return-Path: <alvaro.retana@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1160E12D967; Thu, 3 May 2018 12:10:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 8N6IqxCkFbNh; Thu, 3 May 2018 12:10:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (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 AF05E12DA06; Thu, 3 May 2018 12:10:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml703-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 77E12B5A2F836; Thu, 3 May 2018 20:10:26 +0100 (IST)
Received: from SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.38) by lhreml703-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.44) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.382.0; Thu, 3 May 2018 20:10:28 +0100
Received: from SJCEML521-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.34]) by SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.62]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Thu, 3 May 2018 12:10:24 -0700
From: Alvaro Retana <alvaro.retana@huawei.com>
To: Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>, rtg-dir <rtg-dir@ietf.org>
CC: lsr <lsr@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te.all" <draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te.all@ietf.org>, rtg-ads <rtg-ads@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te-02
Thread-Index: AQHT4wL6AxRaMfddskKbjLrpJGOix6QeXsCj
Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 19:10:23 +0000
Message-ID: <29C261AADAA83847826BD136C22FC8880120C333@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <152536799456.4442.2733959917314042989@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <152536799456.4442.2733959917314042989@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_29C261AADAA83847826BD136C22FC8880120C333sjceml521mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/USaSL8Y7vrM0a7yrmD8nds6NPgQ>
Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te-02
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
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: Thu, 03 May 2018 19:10:33 -0000

[Speaking as an author.]

Hi Ben!

Thanks for the review. We will address these nits in a future revision of the draft.

Alvaro.
From: Ben Niven-Jenkins
To: rtg-dir<rtg-dir@ietf.org<mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org>>
Cc: lsr<lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>;draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te.all<draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te.all@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te.all@ietf.org>>;rtg-ads<rtg-ads@ietf.org<mailto:rtg-ads@ietf.org>>
Subject: Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te-02
Time: 2018-05-03 12:20:05

Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins
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-ospf-xaf-te-02.txt
Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins
Review Date: 3 May 2018
Intended Status: Standards Track

Summary: This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that
should be considered prior to publication.

Comments: The document is readable and succinctly addresses the use case
outlined.

Minor issues:
Section 3, paragraph 4 states:

   If the Node Attribute TLV carries both the Node IPv4 Local Address
   sub-TLV and the Node IPv6 Local Address sub-TLV, then the X-AF
   component must be considered for the consolidated calculation of MPLS
   TE LSPs.

Is the lowercase must supposed to be an uppercase MUST?

Nits:
Section 4, paragraph 1 states:

   Way of using
   these TLVs as specified in this document is fully backward compatible
   with previous standard documents.

This does not read quite right to me. Maybe you should consider rewording it to
something like the text I suggest below. Also when you say “standard documents”
do you mean RFCs? Is it worth citing an example for completeness?

   The way these TLVs are used, as specified in this document, is fully
   backward compatible with earlier RFCs.

Regards
Ben

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email