Re: [Teas] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-06: (with COMMENT)

Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com> Thu, 28 September 2017 03:47 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 ADCAE13529F; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 20:47:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 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, 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 sibIa05q1G4d; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 20:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x234.google.com (mail-it0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::234]) (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 9CBA813529D; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 20:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x234.google.com with SMTP id d192so749611itd.1; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 20:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LlZG/F2Pd80Tv69S1FsBS5qGEzHiJhOjh3dsQ+xwLmo=; b=koZoFgkN66PUZwyh3nCB3VlqFMu7JknQbjcb5EgQ0vwerWYsEM03lpbHfNnnHQ0mMg 3clDNUScjEY97Wwtuljr91ZQNJWfatssiKuo7xttNBxlODU8I0cD4P4O9zJk1keOZysg XQ29ESptK/5vptm87BoRLzcfd5jDxgTHiqCSREq+mUwl0932aiU325XTjDzsPnrlspU4 W9/XDx6npAR1239cQQssrkHopZMRxeTsg2A+FuR8pfqsxSVbaPTQI6zsJISL3R+MKq+f dBRAdPWQvmmiGPlISDPerfxcTTAZGgursYCF92YgPzEUrLuHj/6BnXs+ZQbWXKehvkZX a8/g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LlZG/F2Pd80Tv69S1FsBS5qGEzHiJhOjh3dsQ+xwLmo=; b=DmBCXhBvVB2jPCA2WyZ3L43/2AadXzB7LEOHI7hmz33OAblDkje9Hb6+VPVBDyzpZ6 itnAoNlDh+XWf9oOEGaBnWVJ7iEWNWyY7cnC+TvtOjpibocQeIPqYTzki7zKAq/1N2MZ +UYqamtG+YXuRXSfFetHw3nuwJgeo30F8EtfuwmY3TtQTfKTsRgcFY3lX8/utR3Bggpg 1s5ZmJm3SXPlT3cGbrnxp433hgTVtHE0Cn7A8TKXPQKbVneirKO0qzt1EuemI5osA4kd Q/UJ3HP6BH6Zw3AeVdDWIxtJUZOPlbuR1EsHmPbTvbkx7ltPZZijUkly0T8Hj5utZcAD zJvg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUizjZhshHtmucotKdJYApStpISg2zZoExJBHfqL9T7LJu7NLHJm 4VpvBfXRY/US7WS4AeCLz9sJf3E9nzL+/Xcoa1X9RCwI
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QBdV4XafBOAUSgSnxHHEzwHyQUnABmpHtNTvoQbggGFLynEQjWEFcp/3USCF/pIQNHcfF4Ixf0xdJqZHQvIsAs=
X-Received: by 10.36.140.77 with SMTP id j74mr3735516itd.95.1506570427019; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 20:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.7.216 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 20:47:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <150648943832.24979.8479092732800144290.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <150648943832.24979.8479092732800144290.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 23:47:06 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+YzgTtierRvhkYL9TF6ksF_Dv2745_s9yCfgyvSuf71JUke+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec@ietf.org, TEAS WG Chairs <teas-chairs@ietf.org>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1145eee821b7ee055a37c313"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/UDxD8U1FlPn73jMcnTO_yeKrXe0>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 03:47:10 -0000

Adam, Hi!

Thanks for the review. We just posted a new revision (-07) to address the
Gen-Art review comments. Please go through the new diffs (
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-07)
and let us know if additional changes are required.

Also, please go through the responses provided to the other review comments
and let us know if there are still any unanswered questions.

Regards,
-Pavan

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:

> Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-06: 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-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I have some reservations around certain aspects of the document, but
> they've
> largely been captured by other IESG members. I'll reiterate two of them
> here,
> phrased as concrete suggestions.
>
> Change the title to something more like "Protocol Enhancements to
> Improve...",
> and rephrase all uses of the word "recommendation" to instead refer to the
> techniques described in the document.
>
> Clarify that the retransmission of messages described in section 2.1.3
> does not
> continue for years or decades: specify a limit after which retransmission
> ceases even without an ACK.
>
> Please expand the following acronyms upon first use and in the title;
> see https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt for
> guidance.
>
>  - RSVP-TE - RSVP Traffic Engineering
>  - LSR - Label Switching Router
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> Teas@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>