[RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-detnet-ip-over-mpls-04.txt

Tomonori Takeda <tomonori.takeda.fk@hco.ntt.co.jp> Fri, 27 December 2019 01:35 UTC

Return-Path: <tomonori.takeda.fk@hco.ntt.co.jp>
X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72DC11200E7; Thu, 26 Dec 2019 17:35:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IcdenDgEmt5I; Thu, 26 Dec 2019 17:35:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dish-sg.nttdocomo.co.jp (dish-sg.nttdocomo.co.jp []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE27112009C; Thu, 26 Dec 2019 17:35:10 -0800 (PST)
X-dD-Source: Outbound
Received: from zssg-mailmd102.ddreams.local (zssg-mailmd900.ddreams.local []) by zssg-mailou101.ddreams.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD9421200CC; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:35:09 +0900 (JST)
Received: from zssg-mailcc302.ddreams.local (zssg-mailcc302.ddreams.local []) by zssg-mailmd102.ddreams.local (dDREAMS) with ESMTP id <0Q3500BK6DQLE750@dDREAMS>; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:35:09 +0900 (JST)
Received: from zssg-mailcc301 (localhost []) by zssg-mailcc302.ddreams.local (unknown) with SMTP id xBR1Z9cw057719; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:35:09 +0900
Received: from zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (unknown []) by zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id F01D17E6036; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:34:59 +0900 (JST)
Received: from zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (unknown []) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE12C8E6064; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:34:59 +0900 (JST)
Received: from localhost (unknown []) by IMSVA (Postfix) with SMTP id EBF388E6060; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:34:59 +0900 (JST)
X-IMSS-HAND-OFF-DIRECTIVE: localhost:10026
Received: from zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (unknown []) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5857C8E605A; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:34:59 +0900 (JST)
Received: from zssg-mailua104.ddreams.local (unknown []) by zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:34:59 +0900 (JST)
Received: from rcR9102252 (unknown []) by zssg-mailua104.ddreams.local (dDREAMS) with ESMTPA id <0Q3500OL7DQ3HSE0@dDREAMS>; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:34:52 +0900 (JST)
From: Tomonori Takeda <tomonori.takeda.fk@hco.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2019 10:34:51 +0900
Message-id: <002901d5bc55$d5a7be80$80f73b80$@hco.ntt.co.jp_1>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-language: ja
Thread-index: AdW8VUZIypvNeO5fRWyfvB/SOOAvQA==
To: rtg-ads@ietf.org
Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-detnet-ip-over-mpls.all@ietf.org, detnet@ietf.org
X-CC-Mail-RelayStamp: CC/Mail Relayed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/_DAUS2asNZRQm3rLIcsCLdjTOYs>
Subject: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-detnet-ip-over-mpls-04.txt
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 27 Dec 2019 01:35:16 -0000


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 :

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-detnet-ip-over-mpls-04.txt
Reviewer: Tomonori Takeda
Review Date: Dec 27th, 2019
IETF LC End Date: Not known
Intended Status: Standards Track

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

o Comments:
This document specifies data plane procedures for Detnet IP over Detnet MPLS, using Detnet IP and Detnet MPLS specified in other

This document is fairly straight-forward based on related documents (detnet-ip, detnet-mpls, detnet-data-plane-framework, RFC8655).

o Major Issues:

o Minor Issues:
I am a bit confused how "aggregation" is applied in Detnet IP over Detnet MPLS.

In Section 3, it says, "an IP flow is mapped to one or more PWs and MPLS (TE) LSPs."

By reading detnet-mpls, aggregation (aggregating individual flows and their associated resource into a larger aggregate ) is
achieved via LSP hierarchy.

Does this mean that in Detnet IP over Detnet MPLS context, LSP hierarchy is mandatory for aggregation? Or is it possible to map
multiple Detnet IP flows into one PW as an aggregate?

I think it is better clarify this in the document.

- It seems text in Section 5.1 references wrong sections. For example,
  - "the procedures defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] Section 6.1." (which does not exist).
  - "defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] Section 5.4." (which does not exist).
  - "defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] Section 7.1." (which does not exist).

- It is good to have "PRF" and "PEF/POF" in Section 2.2 (Abbreviations).