Re: [Teas] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework-14: (with COMMENT)

[Leeyoung <[e-mail]>]

Hi Martin,

On your one outstanding question, you are correct. In Figure 2, the NO and SP are merged. 

With this, are there any other issues still pending? Please let us know. 

Thanks.
Young

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Vigoureux [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2018 3:03 AM
To: Daniele Ceccarelli <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; 'The IESG' <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Teas] Martin Vigoureux's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework-14: (with COMMENT)

Thank you Daniele.

I had one outstanding question:

Fig. 1 shows the Customer in relation with the Service Provider but Fig. 
2 shows a boundary between Customer and Network Operator. Are the NO and SP merged in Fig. 2?

Thx
-m

Le 2018-05-25 à 8:28, Daniele Ceccarelli a écrit :
> Hi Martin,
> 
> cleaning up a bit
> [snip]
> 
>>> [DC] We’re referring to the documents that describe the ACTN MPI and 
>>> CMI interfaces. (which is basically a set of YANG models like e.g. 
>>> the TE-Topology, TE-tunnel, etc). Basically the idea is: “I’m not 
>>> telling you here what you have to implement to be compliant with and 
>>> ACTN MPI, but it you can implement and ACTN MPI on top of one of the 
>>> boxes listed above, such box can be put into the ACTN controllers 
>>> hierarchy and that works just fine”.
>> ok ...
>> So you're saying that what an implementation would have to comply 
>> with is out of the scope of this document. Why not be explicit about that?
>>
> [>DC] Exactly. Yes, worth saying it.
> 
>> What about my comment on NBI?
> [>DC] missed it sorry. Since it occurs just once we can extend it.
> 
> [snip]
>>>
>>> 4.1. MDSC Hierarchy
>>>
>>> Can there be more than two levels in the MDSC hierarchy? In other 
>>> words, can an MDSC-L for an MDSC-H be itself an MDSC-H for an MDSC-L?
>>> As a side note, since I made the mistake while writing this, you 
>>> have two occurrences of MSDC (instead of MDSC) in the doc .
> [>DC] will fix it too.
>>>
>>> [DC] exactly, yes.
>> Wouldn't it be worth saying it?
> [>DC] Ok. What about this addition in section 4.1:
> 
> OLD
> The hierarchy of MDSCs can be seen in Figure 4.
> 
> NEW
> The hierarchy of MDSC can be recursive, where an MDSC-H is in turn an MDSC-L to an higher level MDSC-H. An example of hierarchy can be seen in Figure 4.
> 
> 
> 
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Daniele