Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-srlg-collect-05
Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com> Wed, 25 May 2016 18:12 UTC
Return-Path: <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551FB12D130; Wed, 25 May 2016 11:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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=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 w8EmvOS1QgQt; Wed, 25 May 2016 11:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x230.google.com (mail-vk0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::230]) (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 1840C12D096; Wed, 25 May 2016 11:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x230.google.com with SMTP id f66so75599170vkh.2; Wed, 25 May 2016 11:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=QXk79LvohAW3fJJStJcyzid3eJacCz0X22/lG74nulU=; b=JZKM/sXP61gXwLt6hvyGbMNSXFt3JazVjf1e53CQmB4zGcon5TPqgAgKQ1kXqpg29u m6QQusPkxYwvNSV1i6lNCtgZNDWsVtDO3inS57x1lTxBjakp6Uabd4yW9DpTUnUql74f Rixv01vYqekUqcje3opppjfbDmf4C9tlWC+gMU7isaed714IOXhKCpCJaAhf8d+z/d/0 fDJzwc+dNiEwosvNaWPHHdTBsvrQTSUqYJw4nBJDYDrnXAiw4zIbrxvobcseWxcRxGpZ HyIBUZ7uMOT1aFOkZvF9y+o7wui8CnmfmzyaU9p1uA2j9VGksWDpQbt/d1dBc0LfybKP 1XYQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to; bh=QXk79LvohAW3fJJStJcyzid3eJacCz0X22/lG74nulU=; b=MJIULZcDdqtdYY4j5JZ+qjsiKu2hUxTX/Le5OhPiaRUF7sqTiE/mGeaYjk1SNJFtbC 184DGKCdKcrEGXPN1VKvKEIFrVkXu9aa1WvyelbX2PdMtDY8pDsNHySy+huYwQ2dE+Jo +2Hj0tjANsLUU8kTVbyCI3/ZLjWEZAtuS8kM8CT3QMvkN261dbaX8V7+RCjR17nbf6Db yJcZMPMR58vZyQ82gyXO5TwuMPf0UCcO/YPEXMyuDNEaGqd1OziAh+w5Bmi8PoQPQim3 /0eKzeuNLbhe12bwSDWO48gor0eR/NMImICJP1dbZ1x7Uuh8PkgMoum4bojVYlXSuSsS XGRw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLyNDmM8g3ahpdUf3NZ5zALIJP+cdaZIcXbfJ0mJlhctP1+8ygD7rTaz9iLFB7Too0nkow42czD26IWKg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.159.55.196 with SMTP id q62mr2835071uaq.8.1464199971034; Wed, 25 May 2016 11:12:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.31.67.141 with HTTP; Wed, 25 May 2016 11:12:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+YzgTuznVofX6FgRAtP4d8hf0xueXwXS+_tfC7x-M3gak9+KA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YzgTsv1mZZhmeb_nDBZVQcopjb6AtizCy6McgNQwgYB42xhQ@mail.gmail.com> <40746B2300A8FC4AB04EE722A593182BAC1B121C@ONWVEXCHMB04.ciena.com> <CA+YzgTuznVofX6FgRAtP4d8hf0xueXwXS+_tfC7x-M3gak9+KA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 14:12:50 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+YzgTswRo+XjEGw7REP9KUK3paii+7suAfUhFPfRn6_vWyJyw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
To: "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-srlg-collect@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c04cade2762630533ae9f0c"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/AZAO1Vs8wKSr6hBaWoc3rNSidoE>
Subject: Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-srlg-collect-05
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 18:12:54 -0000
Authors, Hi! I'm in the process of updating the Shepherd's write-up for this document. I'm expecting you to submit another rev for this draft (addressing the nits that were raised during the LC). I found a few other nits (pasted below) during my review. Please see if you can take care of these as well in the next rev. I'll resubmit the publication request as soon as the new version shows up. Regards, -Pavan ** Section 1. - s/This document provides a mechanism to collect the SRLGs used by a LSP,/This document provides a signaling mechanism to collect the SRLGs used by a LSP, [Comment - signaling mechanism as opposed to routing mechanism; The introduction section doesn’t explicitly say (maybe it should) that this mechanism is useful in scenarios where the SRLG info cannot be obtained via IGP-TE (via routing)] - s/Note that specification of the the use of the collected SRLGs is outside the scope of this document./Note that specification of the use of the collected SRLGs is outside the scope of this document. [Comment - You may even consider removing the above line altogether (given that the document does discuss an applicability example in 1.1)] Section 3.1: - Fix indentation for the whole section Section 3.2: - Fix indentation for the whole section. - s/SRLG information is for each hop is added to the Path RRO during Path message processing./SRLG information is added by each hop to the Path RRO during Path message processing. - Consider removing the following line [Comment - it doesn’t seem to be bringing in any additional value in this section]: The endpoints of the LSP can make use of the collected SRLG information, for example, for routing, sharing and TE link configuration purposes. Section 3.3: - Fix indentation for the whole section. - s/This means that that the signaling procedure needs to be capable of updating the new SRLG information./This means that the signaling procedure needs to be capable of updating the new SRLG information. Section 3.4: - Fix indentation for the whole section. Section 4.1: - Fix indentation for the first paragraph. Section 6.1 - Policy Configuration: - Fix the bullets; All bullet points “o” are squeezed together in one paragraph. Section 8.2 ROUTE_RECORD Object - Fix the indentation of the table (align it with the table in 8.1) Section 8.3 Policy Control Failure Error subcodes - Fix the indentation of the table (align it with the table in 8.1) On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com> wrote: > The WG LC for this document is now closed. > > Matt (and other authors), > Please go ahead and publish a new revision addressing the minor comments > received during the LC. > > Regards, > -Pavan (and Lou) > > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 6:07 PM, Shah, Himanshu <hshah@ciena.com> wrote: > >> *Sorry for the late reply.. (On PTO..)* >> >> >> >> *While adding of “completion flag” (or similar to “partial bit” used in >> BGP) would have been a nice feature* >> >> *to have, the SRLG collect draft by itself is an important feature to >> have, so..* >> >> >> >> *I support progressing the document to publication.* >> >> >> >> *Thanks,* >> >> *Himanshu* >> >> >> >> *From:* Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Vishnu Pavan >> Beeram >> *Sent:* Thursday, April 28, 2016 4:42 PM >> *To:* teas@ietf.org >> *Subject:* [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-srlg-collect-05 >> >> >> >> All, >> >> This starts a two week working group last call on >> draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-srlg-collect-05. >> >> The working group last call ends on Thursday, May 12th. Please >> send your comments to the TEAS mailing list. >> >> As is always the case, positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this >> document and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome! >> This is useful and important, even from authors. >> >> Note, IPR has been disclosed on this draft. >> >> >> Thanks, >> Pavan (and Lou) >> > >
- [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-sr… Vishnu Pavan Beeram
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Matt Hartley (mhartley)
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Cyril Margaria
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Zhangxian (Xian)
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Matt Hartley (mhartley)
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Zhangxian (Xian)
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Matt Hartley (mhartley)
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Vishnu Pavan Beeram
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Matt Hartley (mhartley)
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Vishnu Pavan Beeram
- Re: [Teas] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-t… Matt Hartley (mhartley)