Fwd: RtgDir review: draft-rtg-dt-encap-02
Erik Nordmark <nordmark@acm.org> Mon, 06 July 2015 16:01 UTC
Return-Path: <nordmark@acm.org>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CFAC1B2F3B for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 09:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.934
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.934 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=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 Zz9FLR7EFgLt for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 09:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c.mail.sonic.net (c.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.80]) (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 59F4E1B2ED4 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 09:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.10.26] ([78.197.168.57]) (authenticated bits=0) by c.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id t66G1cTf010557 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 6 Jul 2015 09:01:40 -0700
Subject: Fwd: RtgDir review: draft-rtg-dt-encap-02
References: <CAAFAkD-vfrXA0ejLE7Gnk=q8wZbS4SzC7+=_TJY+qzTXv4R9OQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
From: Erik Nordmark <nordmark@acm.org>
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <CAAFAkD-vfrXA0ejLE7Gnk=q8wZbS4SzC7+=_TJY+qzTXv4R9OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <559AA65B.2090702@acm.org>
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 18:01:31 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAFAkD-vfrXA0ejLE7Gnk=q8wZbS4SzC7+=_TJY+qzTXv4R9OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------020007030804050804020306"
X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVa7XbqBfBTqhahp2XY3uPUd5gXicUstl/Sd8lefqEgPU6NZljyig6bGAtfegC4BLp54hAgQH+FL5lGoqhOHl8/n
X-Sonic-ID: C;NC0CSfgj5RGGtufp6CYw6A== M;phDeSfgj5RGGtufp6CYw6A==
X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/Ocs7ZQ-XTPlOyHZJYgx-4NjoD9E>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 16:01:59 -0000
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: RtgDir review: draft-rtg-dt-encap-02 Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 05:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-From: hadi@mojatatu.com Resent-To: draft-rtg-dt-encap@ietf.org Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 08:20:46 -0400 From: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@mojatatu.com> To: rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org <rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org> CC: rtg-dir@ietf.org <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, draft-rtg-dt-encap@tools.ietf.org 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-rtg-dt-encap-02 Reviewer: Jamal Hadi Salim Review Date: 6/30/15 (later than requested, sorry) Intended Status: Informational WG LC End Date: unknown Summary: The document has significant good work and recommendations for encapsulation design. Many years of experience in issues found with encapsulation deployments are discussed. There are times where i lost track what the document was about because issues were being discussed without making recommendations on what is needed from an encapsulation perspective to deal with those issues; otoh, a good read is section 18 which would mention an issue and in the same breath suggests how a design should handle said issue. The document needs at least one more pass. I have some minor concerns about this document that I believe are resolvable. Annotated comments attached. cheers, jamal
- Fwd: RtgDir review: draft-rtg-dt-encap-02 Erik Nordmark
- Re: RtgDir review: draft-rtg-dt-encap-02 Erik Nordmark
- Fwd: Re: RtgDir review: draft-rtg-dt-encap-02 Erik Nordmark
- Re: RtgDir review: draft-rtg-dt-encap-02 Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: RtgDir review: draft-rtg-dt-encap-02 Erik Nordmark