Re: [sfc] Submission of draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-tlv-04.txt

[[e-mail]]

Re-,

I would be more than happy to provide text but the issue is that I don't know what is the intent/purpose of many of these TLVs. 

Consider for example this one:  

==
4.7.  Universal Resource Identifier

[[removing the figure]]

   where

      URI (Universal Resource Identifier) Type is four bits-long field
      that specifies the format of the URI field.  This document defines
      the following values for the URI Type field:

      *  0x1: URI in standard string format as defined in [RFC3986].

      *  0x2: URI represented in a compacted hash format.
==

I fail to see what this URI is for and how it can be consumed by upstream SFs. 

The same applies for Ingress Network Node Information and Ingress Network Source Interface. Not clear to me how supplying this information will be useful for upstream SFs. 

Likewise, no clear what is the difference between the Tenant ID in Section 4.2 and 4.3. Why a tenant type is needed in 4.3, but not 4.2. 

The POLICY_ID and Tenant ID are likely to trigger similar discussion (at least by the IESG) as what is documented for Performance Policy Identification and Subscriber ID in draft-ietf-sfc-serviceid-header. The authors may grab whatever text recorded there, as appropriate. 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Joel M. Halpern [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Envoyé : jeudi 7 janvier 2021 17:03
> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN <[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Objet : Re: [sfc] Submission of draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-tlv-04.txt
> 
> Med, thank you for noting the redundant assignment.
> 
> Presuming for discussion that more descriptive text would be helpful
> (that is very often true of many drafts) it seems difficult to ask
> tha authors to provide that since they have written what they think
> is needed.
> 
> Asking you to provide all the text seems a big ask.  Can you at
> least identify which items and which aspects of those items need
> more description?
> 
> Thank you,
> Joel
> 
> On 1/7/2021 10:44 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
> > Hi Wei,
> >
> > Thank you for sharing this updated version.
> >
> > One quick comment: Please remove this line from Section 7 as that
> > value is already assigned to the service identifier TLV.
> >
> > | 0x00  |             Reserved             | This document |
> >
> > I still do think that more text is needed to understand the usage
> of
> > the various attributes.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Med
> >
> > *De :*sfc [mailto:[e-mail]] *De la part de*
> > [e-mail] *Envoyé :* mardi 5 janvier 2021 03:29 *À :*
> > [e-mail] *Objet :* [sfc] Submission of
> > draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-tlv-04.txt
> >
> > Dear chairs and SFCers，
> >
> > I uploaded ver04 of
> > “Network Service Header Metadata Type 2 Variable-
> Length Context Headers”
> > draft.
> >
> > I updated the draft according to the comments received from the
> SFC
> > mailing list.
> >
> > Your comments are always welcome and helpful.
> >
> > And I would like to ask the WG for the consideration of the WGLC.
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
> > ------


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.