[RTG-DIR]回复: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-41
"Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)" <pengshuping@huawei.com> Tue, 10 September 2024 06:18 UTC
Return-Path: <pengshuping@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 0FF0FC14F61F; Mon, 9 Sep 2024 23:18:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.207
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.207 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZGuivZOTymWT; Mon, 9 Sep 2024 23:18:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B077DC14F60E; Mon, 9 Sep 2024 23:18:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.231]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4X2thg3TpFz6K5tY; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:14:43 +0800 (CST)
Received: from lhrpeml100001.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.160.183]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A888140680; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:18:38 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepemf200018.china.huawei.com (7.202.181.11) by lhrpeml100001.china.huawei.com (7.191.160.183) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:18:34 +0100
Received: from kwepemf500017.china.huawei.com (7.202.181.4) by kwepemf200018.china.huawei.com (7.202.181.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:18:32 +0800
Received: from kwepemf500017.china.huawei.com ([7.202.181.4]) by kwepemf500017.china.huawei.com ([7.202.181.4]) with mapi id 15.02.1544.011; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 14:18:32 +0800
From: "Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)" <pengshuping@huawei.com>
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>, "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-41
Thread-Index: AQHbAo1PnxzUHS6ZCUWDdu9ZzwhvGrJP7ZAAgACe0sA=
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 06:18:31 +0000
Message-ID: <7d4d57f767b04ca9ace24a2dd67dc7fd@huawei.com>
References: <172586835774.2647504.2906454583536619008@dt-datatracker-68b7b78cf9-q8rsp> <CO1PR13MB492033F29AFC9FA0D44D2091859A2@CO1PR13MB4920.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CO1PR13MB492033F29AFC9FA0D44D2091859A2@CO1PR13MB4920.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.153.179.165]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7d4d57f767b04ca9ace24a2dd67dc7fdhuaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID-Hash: J5FXEU6B64WEIOUMRHRC4YVPKHZVUF5F
X-Message-ID-Hash: J5FXEU6B64WEIOUMRHRC4YVPKHZVUF5F
X-MailFrom: pengshuping@huawei.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-rtg-dir.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement.all@ietf.org>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [RTG-DIR]回复: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-41
List-Id: Routing Area Directorate <rtg-dir.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/xp9vtYabw-zVpqHtTBuBH2jlUoE>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-dir>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:rtg-dir-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:rtg-dir-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rtg-dir-leave@ietf.org>
Hi Linda, Thank you for your prompt responses. These are good to me. [MEF-70.1] is already a reference. I have no further comments. Best Regards, Shuping 发件人: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com> 发送时间: 2024年9月10日 12:46 收件人: Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) <pengshuping@huawei.com>; rtg-dir@ietf.org 抄送: draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement.all@ietf.org; rtgwg@ietf.org 主题: RE: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-41 Shiping, Thank you very much for the review and the comments. Please see below of the resolutions to your comments & suggestions. Linda -----Original Message----- From: Shuping Peng via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org<mailto:noreply@ietf.org>> Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 12:53 AM To: rtg-dir@ietf.org<mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org> Cc: draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement.all@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement.all@ietf.org>; rtgwg@ietf.org<mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org> Subject: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-41 Reviewer: Shuping Peng Review result: Ready Hello I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of this draft. https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-41&data=05%7C02%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7Cf1b7caed846d4030bd6308dcd0a460aa%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C638614651643563297%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=P16AeEu3bDU8dJTbpleFgdgz45SV7DC8Jf7oNKwE6Lg%3D&reserved=0 The routing directorate will, on request from the working group chair, perform an “early” review of a draft before it is submitted for publication to the IESG. The early review can be performed at any time during the draft’s lifetime as a working group document. The purpose of the early review depends on the stage that the document has reached. As this document is in working group last call, my focus for the review was to determine whether the document is ready to be published. Please consider my comments along with the other working group last call comments. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftrac.tools.ietf.org%2Farea%2Frtg%2Ftrac%2Fwiki%2FRtgDir&data=05%7C02%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7Cf1b7caed846d4030bd6308dcd0a460aa%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C638614651643574460%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=QX2eTpq%2F3POic2R6bGWGasq0J6lWBgtUF2uANSqmJL8%3D&reserved=0 Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-41.txt Reviewer: Shuping Peng Review Date: 9-Sep-24 Intended Status: Informational Summary: This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be considered prior to being submitted to the IESG. Comments: I wonder whether it is necessary to keep the phrase "at the time of writing this document" shown a few times in this document. Every draft is written based on the information obtained at the time of its writing. Moreover, this draft is stratched over seven years for now. It is hard to tell when exactly the corresponding text was written. I noticed in the abstract that 2023 was added, but still. [Linda] the wording "at the tie of writing this document" was requested by DIR early reviewers. Section 2. Page 4. Why is the term "Underlay Connectivity Services" capitalized? And "Application Flows"? [Linda] because the "Underlay Connectivity Services (UCS)" is a service specified in MEF-70.1 & Application Flows is also special terminology specified by MEF70.1 SD-WAN services. The entire wording is taken from MEF70.1. Section 7. Page 19. "While this specific protocol isn't being suggested the risks and vulnerabilities apply to any group key management system." What is "this specific protcol" being mentioned here? [Linda] The Group Key Management [RFC4535]. Changed the wording to the following to improve the clarity. "While [RFC4535] specific protocol isn't being suggested, the risks and vulnerabilities apply to any group key management system." Nits: 1. page 4, s/managing cloud spending/managing Cloud spending [Linda] changed. 2. page 18, s/internet/Internet [Linda] changed. All changes will be reflected in -v42. Linda
- [RTG-DIR]Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-… Shuping Peng via Datatracker
- [RTG-DIR]Re: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rt… Linda Dunbar
- [RTG-DIR]回复: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rt… Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- [RTG-DIR]Re: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rt… Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- [RTG-DIR]Re: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rt… Linda Dunbar