Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] [nvo3] AD review of draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-06
Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Sun, 31 July 2016 05:33 UTC
Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-ooam-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-ooam-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B92D12B058; Sat, 30 Jul 2016 22:33:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 obp_HLXu4v-d; Sat, 30 Jul 2016 22:33:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x229.google.com (mail-yw0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5810F12B049; Sat, 30 Jul 2016 22:33:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x229.google.com with SMTP id j12so147277799ywb.2; Sat, 30 Jul 2016 22:33:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ePusQftpulxfhSusYEPKhlPhQvrpBJ3fwcFXbf8uuj0=; b=yMU/noAWyoAlkxKM0i/PWMcZoSf4zIibjmCKIkatyNsRCLlIdgMMaWoNcZqPYyNIx+ Ow6Qw1cMYFZRPxkPObWp3nSi+lm6I7uAO7v0q3nEI7KDd18XZCgC52QyyFwc6dDzx2Tl xihfWP35qsgnw+gDFf9U9Tnm2KsjIEvCRzg+CM6sSffhgmkOxuOGyfkBJLqoLpAyNgL8 0sQ03VjWtfx0/ZRyMS9xQ8J9OSDQGrRbwp20PQbd6U0WUx/QXbCHH43Pnf3TG+z+lmyN HhJYsE37aB4GtMerOFPkQECZigmf/hsWuLrClLXwuvGcX/CIJ8p0xHa0SK1qIa61SJZt PpLw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ePusQftpulxfhSusYEPKhlPhQvrpBJ3fwcFXbf8uuj0=; b=jlDP/LdBFERP0IEQXIcVdyCuZww0EeFul8rvU605brV0AU1z0VuwlpTsO7Iu5Csz3B 6/ciq4znMsaPIfpVpKYBr/84Xer2laQ6V2fQpaDRrv0vaB7VWe765f9nDC4J5iEC4PfQ YBK3+326IIGAlIOEIDNIMZV8QylP4qWlB4O9SlrMI7m+vbyXTse6NysoDz3WNlhFqiEx X9v5i0OsFqb8imPf5l13CbFyjMreO6mqjgU7ngg3Ppb2DG1kihlXKiinfldbd8hLUsjT RVMs1gbyD5spnY1P267l3l7eIl0xN1bbrZ1s1kGoci/15ToCfsxmcaY7uHAMvbh/E/BH wEuQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouskz1tn/hRRUxtU4erSS/0ZbcOJIbzSy/NUlkZHUbcxE7vVH1005g8VL5FDBjGRVkRbQQuyw37JplNUEw==
X-Received: by 10.129.160.136 with SMTP id x130mr41446143ywg.180.1469943223362; Sat, 30 Jul 2016 22:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.37.204.76 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Jul 2016 22:33:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362F614F50@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com>
References: <CAG4d1rcJMsGeCvSGhUztqFaOVMQafxRmopuTwGcXnOdnTQgt3Q@mail.gmail.com> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362F614F50@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2016 22:33:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmU7qmEJxO3nmTNVKkDAmpc=4piPAHsrJdpxzv=_orchqA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Black, David" <david.black@emc.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c086d94ab2a450538e7d3ca"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-ooam-dt/cNMFfNLwvOrGeTiI__NCbiSKclw>
Cc: rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org, "nvo3@ietf.org" <nvo3@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-nvo3-arch@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-nvo3-arch@ietf.org>, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] [nvo3] AD review of draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-06
X-BeenThere: rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: List is used by the Routing Area Overlay OAM Design team for internal coordination and discussion <rtg-ooam-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-ooam-dt>, <mailto:rtg-ooam-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-ooam-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-ooam-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-ooam-dt>, <mailto:rtg-ooam-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 05:33:46 -0000
Hi David, greatly appreciate your consideration of draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-ooam-requirement-01. If you have comments, any questions, suggestions please share them and we'll work to address them in timely manner. Regards, Greg On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Black, David <david.black@emc.com> wrote: > Hi Alia, > > > > > I will optimistically send this document to IETF Last Call - but the > authors do need to update this section and respond to my other concerns. > > > > Thanks for doing this. Regarding your Major concern: > > > > > i) I note that draft-ashwood-nvo3-operational-requirement-03 expired > about 3 years ago. Section 12 basically says that > > > OAM is important and punts to this draft. I believe that you will need > more details. > > > > Would it be acceptable to provide a little bit more in the way of details > and then point to draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-ooam-requirement-01 ? > > It seems preferable to have overlay OAM requirements discussions in the > context of that draft rather than this NVO3 architecture draft. > > > > For your first minor concern: > > > > > 1) Please add C-VID to the terminology. It is used without context > in 3.1.1. > > > > I think we should rewrite that sentence to just eliminate the C-VID > acronym, e.g., > > > > OLD > > Note that the handling of C-VIDs has additional complications, as > > described in Section 4.2.1 below. > > NEW > > Note that there are additional considerations when VLAN tags are used to > > identify both the VN and a Tenant System VLAN within that VN, > > as described in Section 4.2.1 below. > > > > Everything else appears to be useful editorial suggestions. > > > > Thanks, --David > > > > *From:* Alia Atlas [mailto:akatlas@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Friday, July 29, 2016 6:14 PM > *To:* nvo3@ietf.org; draft-ietf-nvo3-arch@ietf.org > *Subject:* AD review of draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-06 > > > > First, I would like to thank the authors, David, Jon, Larry, Marc, and > Thomas, for their work on this draft and pushing it to completion. > > > > As is customary, I have done my AD review of draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-06 > before progressing it. I do apologize for the delay in my review; I had a > lot of documents show up quite quickly this winter and spring. > > > > My primary concern is around the operational and management > considerations. My detailed review is below. I will optimistically send > this document to IETF Last Call - but the authors do need to update this > section and respond to my other concerns. If they are timely, then this > can make it onto the IESG telechat on August 18. > > > > Major: > > > > i) I note that draft-ashwood-nvo3-operational-requirement-03 expired > about 3 years ago. Section 12 basically says that OAM is important and > punts to this draft. I believe that you will need more details. > > > > Minor: > > > > 1) Please add C-VID to the terminology. It is used without context in > 3.1.1. > > > > 2)In Sec 4.1: "While there may be APIs between the NVE and hypervisor > to support necessary interaction, the details of such an API are not > in-scope for the IETF to work on." > > Could this be softened to "not specifically in-scope for the NVO3 WG to > work on"? If there were agreement that the NVE and hypervisors need > interoperability, I could see APIs being in scope. > > > > 3) It looks like work on draft-ietf-nvo3-dataplane-requirements-03 has > been abandoned (which is fine). Please remove the reference. > > > > > > Nits: > > > a) In Sec 3.4, it says "in use today". Replace with "in use in 2016" or > the like - since the RFC will live for a long time and not be updated with > "today" systems. > > > > Regards & Thanks, > > Alia > > _______________________________________________ > nvo3 mailing list > nvo3@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 > >
- [Rtg-ooam-dt] ***UNCHECKED*** Re: [nvo3] AD revie… Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)
- Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] [nvo3] AD review of draft-ietf-… Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)
- Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] [nvo3] AD review of draft-ietf-… Black, David
- Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] [nvo3] AD review of draft-ietf-… Alia Atlas
- Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] [nvo3] AD review of draft-ietf-… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] [nvo3] AD review of draft-ietf-… Black, David
- Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] [nvo3] AD review of draft-ietf-… Greg Mirsky