Re: [Softwires] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-softwire-yang-14: (with COMMENT)

ianfarrer@gmx.com Wed, 09 January 2019 16:15 UTC

Return-Path: <ianfarrer@gmx.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A3E5128CB7; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 08:15:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 ZDi1xNJ7MDMp; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 08:15:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (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 AC17F130E6C; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 08:15:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ians-mbp.lan ([80.159.240.8]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002 [212.227.17.184]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M9b03-1gZJM202PP-00CwkS; Wed, 09 Jan 2019 17:15:33 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
From: ianfarrer@gmx.com
In-Reply-To: <154688080834.23339.13017406674509798540.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 17:15:32 +0100
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-softwire-yang@ietf.org, Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>, softwire-chairs@ietf.org, softwires@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0AF84D99-3E37-4CE7-8607-01DAADDD571A@gmx.com>
References: <154688080834.23339.13017406674509798540.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: =?utf-8?Q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind?= <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:CqiqHkK7Stb7E15x1nf1ycqJtqGTq29Cmpt9/dH3AGw4MFA6ynm Wx7UN5xmVQEeu3z0IZAEMneYfzrONkov8jmqJy2zoZ3mlYPeH3gZH6vj9lPmb2516MtsjbS 2tq7RYsd61LegnF3OXPKoYabcf1baBzel0zGcOsFvi3+H5RiO1yqVBpgt4hQI1yMxhBHGg5 qfU8tlNQYfFbj2+qDInfw==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:XmDA4CY3nq8=:TGGZFl58KMNARP1cI7+maN ahKXcL8+3mD2XoEEmKoLkrnE+yM09ZIj9/E+GWz4aVezxgO/eNcpv4YzL7MPIiCHpUIu1R1B8 RL/rKz1EWCjrJXb9EIKS/mgRoinxjaKvilZWjLtSAU4IQOInU1YYLPzlbh3JL4RRH6JwKp1WR UKtv9gQwRKvbIx/YQniNtg8qFxVWZUIy1QCK/otXxaexT/xkUjbvRLFrY3mZxCez2awODgR7C ARvMzsXYhXi1xu6bKFQT3x4/WAuo5tJ/65ANIOXUckV8O6o7VWOYljXNVtxd5t/HWxkqZmOI1 2AOHNcQF1zrSwnZQMWOaPJwv2dqng0XvSEHOXNNNYEtiXUiAn8swOII+jfnllDQ2vUYJtUNyT OvDDJL5oAlOnd5kbgffXmrW8QzKn7ZUr4O46sT0KoJ50OCaIEyVn8QqAEenr1Zf5x8G5ISgAk AUkIyEZpqySqZ4X2+iMgT4TGz6KoTBuzfcUnQxyeAuaA52AxuX/cX//t37LO0O5arOMstrXdp 5JKlAUKUj8rTp3CU3ng/4OSYOQ/L4BmkZ76RJ8/EzYXApBaF5bIbGffmpE3AhcJPLQHmdBtZM LBAMN2aIR83Uyi6PfLwWLTf6AXSa/NDBUwKGY+UZElFKdcbG9AOMQjPt9NYAwCkWbBGZWfRXB gSRutkOYBrrEPA1dnjcQGgCmncLO+jTVzXMkUSaLo4R5r9CfAz1byPIBwFpZ4rxkKrdXJrV0+ xGJ3cJZ4rO5/bIXQB24nrD8a+W+IkttXZFJBN/e21Q8vUEfdUdQ6mFuDRHYaJeXjEm1fKfArl k1hdcDcUO5KwycYiQnMqVsjb0ZlPfaDf8h+L7ETP5jpe4n+ZwjSV+9fZrqOodpO5xo/a59iXN 6yi2e4W0wk4xda5fb+DgsqXOppkTIepumuk4SQnJu8Ff3QPUXjKBPS+CVS5zJK
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/softwires/BCPHBke9C5dRKuJEtGoPvDfWWM8>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objection_on_d?= =?utf-8?q?raft-ietf-softwire-yang-14=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/softwires/>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 16:15:48 -0000

Hi Mirja,

Thanks for your comments. Please see inline below.

Regards,
Ian

> On 7. Jan 2019, at 18:06, Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>; wrote:
> 
> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-softwire-yang-14: No Objection
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-softwire-yang/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Some minor comments:
> 
> 1) Sec 4.2:
> "softwire-path-mru: optionally used to set the maximum IPv6
>      softwire packet size that can be received, including the
>      encapsulation/translation overhead.  Needed if the softwire
>      implementation is unable to correctly calculate the correct IPv4
>      Maximum Receive Unit (MRU) size automatically [RFC4213]."
> I guess this should both be IPv6…?

[if - This parameter is provided to address the possible fragmentation
problems described in RFC4213 section 3.2, where the sender is sending
encapsulated packets based on the IPv6 MTU resulting in the receiver
getting IPv4 payloads larger than they can process, or requiring the IPv4
to be fragmented, so the second IPv4 is correct.


Would the following wording for the second sentence make this more clear?:

Needed if the softwire implementation is unable to correctly
calculate the correct IPv4 payload Maximum Receive Unit (MRU)
size automatically (see Section 3.2 of [RFC4213]).
]


> 
> 2) Why does the description of "rcvd-ipv4-bytes" say
> "IPv4 traffic received for processing, in bytes"..?
> Does the "for processing" have any special meaning or why is it only phrased
> like this for that one entry?

[if - No special meaning is intended. Will reword with:

IPv4 traffic received, in bytes.
]

> 
> 3) Also the description for "sent-ipv4-bytes" and "sent-ipv4-packets" could be
> unified.

[if - Will reword the rcvd-ipv4-packets description (also aligned with the rcvd-ipv6-packets
description:

Number of IPv4 packets received.
]
> 
>