Re: [spring] 6man w.g. last call for <draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam>

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Tue, 21 January 2020 07:16 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B5E31200B6; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 23:16:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 JOEjdAzneI8J; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 23:16:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42d.google.com (mail-wr1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42d]) (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 204F7120096; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 23:16:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id c14so1903864wrn.7; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 23:16:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=hrWJlBPBFfZAW3bLBq6xF/Wl0a5lf2vCs4HZ5Dy3wh8=; b=LCkRHTblIlsFB61EgUSeUDOvmUE+bf+LRdmB8wOhJwug6AH9onkWAxVKVGRXB+kmhh PHs1PO2mkMqESyoyxRDNr7efKeasoMOIbH2B0FCOiM9qerQwTmBDatYW2e4wpBbLonXH lnBjb7SuMY1E6ZqhFz6qToKsTHWLFwq5a3Ke+lptsTr958tMKUNbeoFbzBkiLA+bdpQj 3ScNP5I9yByiUJ8la7D9E/Tzk2FEHiL9fcpWqFD4B8aHs3wp+hzb5XcWa2sAOhEW4n4E OyeD+tJ1fUGcw3CyGo+ZiBv/SsT8rScWlY81Ex/cj0aMUt5eAwBv8KxVP+OIBP5ML/Er lh0A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=hrWJlBPBFfZAW3bLBq6xF/Wl0a5lf2vCs4HZ5Dy3wh8=; b=jOEJRr3HXKdXqXGMHTRSeIg8Er2dyw3VypFITLq2TDQtM6Ho5DapoSYNFnKU3/C0eh yThzmaIyqzgaPVkrFuSTP8EizN2sR2d5WG+xPmgSgvhdquG6ww59TflC6kUb9aqqCZUx rnfDJzlbhIc8pcz+SYZzH7jdSrt/zkWkPeT6w4hT/Mefz2Lds/91yem5TbcvfmXSze0m ma1Q8XmtRSi1hBe6p1W7e/5Y3EJROhJCK1Tvon7dIOrI+TxxYYju+HC8ONqDAEnaU0dm ucP85C51whOA0td3Qqec4FxQWRk7l7hMvJR8Do6H+1SEGtBoO/E9bzfBcOmg+wjnBlzw XnwA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUPDgSLEobL9GYkgvYuc8wpKyC2Rn+ZXGBo1aoYPR2Lv5KcAaKQ 0xH3tO4Z5aJXOLrbZ6Sa4Bg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyXiWfsguV948wJENVtWAZROcppInMhPb/bJTEpHj3vgkP1ckyvWGL/r6zHOMngTunULIUJ6g==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:f2c1:: with SMTP id d1mr3479593wrp.111.1579590976520; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 23:16:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:e9fc:121b:8eb4:6e55? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:e9fc:121b:8eb4:6e55]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x17sm50088627wrt.74.2020.01.20.23.16.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 20 Jan 2020 23:16:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <8C58EB4D-4CCE-43A9-A900-1CDF8BD6FBF1@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_675623EC-AE8F-4F6D-8287-D9CE91DA29C2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 23:16:10 -0800
In-Reply-To: <bff1d06b-e289-8179-9c04-e9a8c6bc3edd@pi.nu>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>, 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@ietf.org>
To: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
References: <ECC21DA8-0156-41D2-921E-177389D3C904@employees.org> <09adcd59-13ae-448b-6a48-5e7471dbd121@pi.nu> <C99D9E82-15F6-4F57-8850-708B5CE274D3@gmail.com> <bff1d06b-e289-8179-9c04-e9a8c6bc3edd@pi.nu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/NspTVYZrlXTiZYpDVU-K1C7DviI>
Subject: Re: [spring] 6man w.g. last call for <draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam>
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 07:16:24 -0000

Loa,

Thanks, that is very helpful.

Bob


> On Jan 20, 2020, at 6:20 PM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
> 
> Bob,
> 
> 
> Here is the docx-file, it is not exactly the same version as I used to
> create the txt-file, since I continued to look at the figure for the
> reference topology, and in that process I also corrected a spelling
> erros and cleared up the text for some comments.
> 
> The only real change is that I have added an alternative to the figure
> (note: no problems with the topology itself) for the reference topology
> at the end of the docx file.
> 
> /Loa
> 
> On 20/01/2020 19:12, Bob Hinden wrote:
>> Loa,
>> Thanks for doing the review.  I think it may be worthwhile to also send out the .docx file in addition to the text version.
>> Bob
>>> On Jan 19, 2020, at 11:54 PM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> WG,
>>> 
>>> I have reviewed the entire document.
>>> 
>>> First, I'm not an IPv6 expert.
>>> 
>>> As far as I can see the sued on
>>> 
>>> I have not used github, I had a couple of attempts to learn the tools,
>>> but so far I have failed.
>>> 
>>> I have instead done what I use to do, use the review tool with Word.
>>> 
>>> Since I sometimes have a pushback on the docx-format I save the result
>>> as a .txt-file. Drawback is that all comment show up as refrences to a
>>> list at the end of the document. But you can't get everything.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> /Loa
>>> 
>>> PS gives this output for this draft; it is quite a lot and in itself are
>>> so much that it is worth sending it bck to the authors and asking them
>>> to fix it. Was the noits tool checked at all before starting the wglc?
>>> 
>>> idnits 2.16.02
>>> 
>>> /tmp/draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-03.txt:
>>> 
>>>  Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see
>>>  https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info):
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>>     No issues found here.
>>> 
>>>  Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt:
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>>     No issues found here.
>>> 
>>>  Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist :
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>>  ** There are 3 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one
>>>     being 6 characters in excess of 72.
>>> 
>>>  == There are 5 instances of lines with non-RFC3849-compliant IPv6 addresses
>>>     in the document.  If these are example addresses, they should be changed.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  Miscellaneous warnings:
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>>  == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not
>>>     match the current year
>>> 
>>>  -- The exact meaning of the all-uppercase expression 'MAY NOT' is not
>>>     defined in RFC 2119.  If it is intended as a requirements expression, it
>>>     should be rewritten using one of the combinations defined in RFC 2119;
>>>     otherwise it should not be all-uppercase.
>>> 
>>>  == The expression 'MAY NOT', while looking like RFC 2119 requirements text,
>>>     is not defined in RFC 2119, and should not be used.  Consider using 'MUST
>>>     NOT' instead (if that is what you mean).
>>> 
>>>     Found 'MAY NOT' in this paragraph:
>>> 
>>>     To perform ICMPv6 ping to a target SID an echo request message is
>>>     generated by the initiator with the END.OP or END.OTP SID in the
>>>     segment-list of the SRH immediately preceding the target SID. There MAY
>>>     or MAY NOT be additional segments preceding the END.OP/ END.OTP SID.
>>> 
>>>  == The expression 'MAY NOT', while looking like RFC 2119 requirements text,
>>>     is not defined in RFC 2119, and should not be used.  Consider using 'MUST
>>>     NOT' instead (if that is what you mean).
>>> 
>>>     Found 'MAY NOT' in this paragraph:
>>> 
>>>     To traceroute a target SID a probe message is generated by the
>>>     initiator with the END.OP or END.OTP SID in the segment-list of the SRH
>>>     immediately preceding the target SID.  There MAY or MAY NOT be additional
>>>     segments preceding the END.OP/ END.OTP SID.
>>> 
>>>  -- The document date (December 18, 2019) is 32 days in the past.  Is this
>>>     intentional?
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>>     (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references
>>>     to lower-maturity documents in RFCs)
>>> 
>>>  == Missing Reference: 'SL' is mentioned on line 190, but not defined
>>> 
>>>  -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '2' on line 191
>>> 
>>>  -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '1' on line 191
>>> 
>>>  -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '0' on line 192
>>> 
>>>  == Missing Reference: 'RFC7011' is mentioned on line 230, but not defined
>>> 
>>>  == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext' is mentioned on line
>>>     241, but not defined
>>> 
>>>  == Missing Reference: 'RFC792' is mentioned on line 701, but not defined
>>> 
>>>  == Missing Reference: 'RFC 8403' is mentioned on line 660, but not defined
>>> 
>>>  == Unused Reference: 'RFC0792' is defined on line 823, but no explicit
>>>     reference was found in the text
>>> 
>>>  == Unused Reference: 'RFC8403' is defined on line 843, but no explicit
>>>     reference was found in the text
>>> 
>>>  == Outdated reference: A later version (-08) exists of
>>>     draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-06
>>> 
>>> 
>>>     Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 12 warnings (==), 5 comments (--).
>>> 
>>>     Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about
>>>     the items above.
>>> 
>>> On 05/12/2019 04:53, Ole Troan wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>   As agreed in the working group session in Singapore, this message starts a new two week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on advancing:
>>>>   Title    : Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in Segment Routing Networks with IPv6 Data plane (SRv6)
>>>>   Author   : Z. Ali, C. Filsfils, S. Matsushima, D. Voyer, M. Chen
>>>>   Filename : draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-02
>>>>   Pages    : 23
>>>>   Date     : 2019-11-20
>>>>                               https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam/
>>>> as a Proposed Standard.
>>>> Substantive comments and statements of support for publishing this document should be directed to the mailing list.
>>>> Editorial suggestions can be sent to the author. This last call will end on the 18th of December 2019.
>>>> To improve document quality and ensure that bugs are caught as early as possible, we would require at least
>>>> two reviewers to do a complete review of the document.  Please let the chairs know if you are willing to be a reviewer.
>>>> The last call will be forwarded to the spring working group, with discussion directed to the ipv6 list.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Bob & Ole, 6man co-chairs
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>>> ipv6@ietf.org
>>>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
>>> Senior MPLS Expert
>>> Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64
>>> <draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-03.txt>
> 
> --
> 
> 
> Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
> Senior MPLS Expert
> Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64
> <draft-ietf-6man-spring-srv6-oam-03-A.docx>