Re: [Softwires] [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-23

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 26 September 2018 23:28 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 6654B128CFD; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=xFaiJAsx; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=lcpE0T9u
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 rPnnXXOaLm00; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 16:28:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0D01130DC4; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 16:28:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA17B20B71; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 19:28:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 26 Sep 2018 19:28:46 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=pnIKnzklYGomA86NcvsuvarT8z6q/ VYzrStCKsJT9/s=; b=xFaiJAsxZCfcpHbVcClnwuhTVGFAMLZNzWT+/7fei5Tog v3LV20NlVbGt3xVTn7i1QsbbqxCZgOrtfRJvS/RHSwAYserQ5nRjq3eIwv5lv5RQ Ed7w45Wo/UJMKOsL9zbBkvWDjvOmDV5ZTdAVmWKD5U+4APsYstu1cQLBSKRfbVUK 5Dxejo7LPnjtFVT07EhUlddXTzhixYS4+wdlDkkMObrYzJJ2lU2gS2MW69pWFBQu AGswBQIYUCvtJdLvNHgbTl2UIPDJvev7umHxlvfq8vCdAccJ6QJ8Oy0hnSINNR7u MDOoXTI4MG7A1pPkyOM63c7Whny5bdtR+fXYjCHQQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=pnIKnz klYGomA86NcvsuvarT8z6q/VYzrStCKsJT9/s=; b=lcpE0T9u2lSmGYCVgz/TfM isNWKMOXuIL4rB35lqGvsNOO9IcEAlAkU346ShVtYjyAy59MR49tIHH8Eop5f2Ou O/6xkIhIAhiPL0KqEvI+nYWPI+tLpuwPxrC2BQT0tk2Id3CR3uCAoDO9mHgjI97Q ThLCoWmAWkt39u9vmJT8keSgWeqFC//v9ilz1m0tfUaqnsJ2RIZUguh21V7PJk/y PT5VPvBBma5BHIzOso9XjSOlvUiNOqHhapY3eUgM+55xkSH42DFwBeTKnFPzZccy ARBfwrIWPjs316NFE9nmMp+osKiaZo6gYfeJzHGHiSmodNSpQ+gn6MzM210Hn5Cw ==
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:LhasW4do-BN30IQV1znjaW1Xm-mqu6m8LXqgsDob2v93PpLW3iyqXA> <xmx:LhasW0CQgUkU00DTG8IsX3HKTg67xtbZhF1scToSKHB0Ef29CeyHqg> <xmx:LhasW2FzJTtemdAT5r0v6UlLRly5UOJiJ07zFovuKdz8k0LpiH4Dsg> <xmx:LhasW7XAT2i6xEIgx6BeOK7vLVB3LS2j8l-BcC9XLE27DRp76qrsxQ> <xmx:LhasW_PhFKtSNZCoP5LxxVuafZnd-8nK9Qxv03EjbE0UCo_rq4ayjw> <xmx:LhasW5iHNE_RhtGSEqdEc3isniSyKpuyiRb1SwffTzgDc-jcX5LLhA>
X-ME-Sender: <xms:LhasW7AA_n_0nIMRTQM5VcFwZ0fw_Ie4KE9EpnutLbgtNeYM-rdzrQ>
Received: from [10.154.183.69] (unknown [128.107.241.173]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 79C7BE47C2; Wed, 26 Sep 2018 19:28:45 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <153758638003.20283.4982182987407951412@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 16:28:43 -0700
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, softwires@ietf.org, draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast.all@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A5B83975-74D4-484F-9A64-46BC75E536FC@cooperw.in>
References: <153758638003.20283.4982182987407951412@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/softwires/Uf5TXyi7_LI89eyhaHf9kdjPDX0>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-23
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, 26 Sep 2018 23:28:51 -0000

Brian, thanks for your reviews of this document. WG, thanks for your responses. 

I entered a No Objection ballot. I think Ole’s response on your point below clarified this.

Alissa

> On Sep 21, 2018, at 8:19 PM, Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
> Review result: Ready with Issues
> 
> Gen-ART telechat review of draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-23
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
> document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-23.txt
> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
> Review Date: 2018-09-22
> IETF LC End Date: 2018-09-06
> IESG Telechat date: 2018-09-27 
> 
> Summary: Ready with issues
> --------
> 
> Comments: 
> ---------
> 
> Thank you for handling my Last Call comments. I am mentioning my previous
> issue again in case the IESG thinks any further change is needed.
> 
> Issue:
> ------
> 
> "7.3.  Fragmentation
> 
>   The encapsulation performed by an upstream AFBR will increase the
>   size of packets.  As a result, the outgoing I-IP link MTU may not
>   accommodate the larger packet size.  It is not always possible for
>   core operators to increase the MTU of every link, thus fragmentation
>   after encapsulation and reassembling of encapsulated packets MUST be
>   supported by AFBRs [RFC5565].  The specific requirements for
>   fragmentation and tunnel configuration COULD be referred to in
>   [I-D.ietf-intarea-tunnels], which is under revision currently."
> 
> This text is significantly improved. However, I still wonder, if I-IP is
> IPv6, how does the originator of the IPv6 packet (the AFBR) know that it
> needs to include a fragment header? In addition to the discussion in
> [I-D.ietf-intarea-tunnels], isn't it necessary to specify that PMTUD
> should be enabled and that ICMPv6 packets must not be filtered?
> 
> Nit:
> ----
> 
> Please change COULD to SHOULD in the above paragraph.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art