Re: [Teas] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc-05

"Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi@cisco.com> Thu, 08 December 2016 14:50 UTC

Return-Path: <rgandhi@cisco.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 F2EE0129A7C; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 06:50:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.418
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.418 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_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 bN5SxWs_VFRu; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 06:50:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AE18129A5D; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 06:50:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7846; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1481208624; x=1482418224; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=+augddtO5TJFBAvbbCRTQO9EKUJV9ec2zCygWcQtN+k=; b=FdzOUHLkzA3/yaKsq1y5/WjRDq5gQK0ur0nxj38gNEcES6XolKXHPecg kWoJ+iEwB9FND4mSp5SWfbZEWyl475/YvNPjirwWSTejwUhs29KBj3YUQ jG6X93Ml805yGwxQ/27aGxltpI0oAhjXLUN0+tx35UvMOVRlJ/Pkj9sMg o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BuAQC6cklY/4YNJK1eGgEBAQECAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QgBAQEBgzcBAQEBAR9agQYHjUOXE5UBgggrhXYCGoFZPxQBAgEBAQEBAQFiKIR?= =?us-ascii?q?pAQQBIxFFBQsCAQgOBgYCJgICAjAVEAIEAQ0FiGMIDqgggimLPgEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAR2BC4UzgX2CXoMLgT0Xgm0tgjAFmmoBhk6KUIFzUIQtiVG?= =?us-ascii?q?OCIQNAR83gRkxAQGFI3IBhySBDQEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,320,1477958400"; d="scan'208";a="358356474"
Received: from alln-core-12.cisco.com ([173.36.13.134]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 08 Dec 2016 14:50:23 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-020.cisco.com (xch-rcd-020.cisco.com [173.37.102.30]) by alln-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id uB8EoN93026835 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 8 Dec 2016 14:50:23 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com (173.36.7.28) by XCH-RCD-020.cisco.com (173.37.102.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 08:50:22 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) by XCH-ALN-018.cisco.com ([173.36.7.28]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 08:50:22 -0600
From: "Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi@cisco.com>
To: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>, "rtg-ads@ietf.org" <rtg-ads@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc-05
Thread-Index: AQHSUIj9PV3ALVd6Zk6COu6uGgavZ6D+NH8A
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 14:50:22 +0000
Message-ID: <48AD5C10-393B-420D-AE80-D8F7D05427ED@cisco.com>
References: <878trrucx9.fsf@chopps.org>
In-Reply-To: <878trrucx9.fsf@chopps.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.15.1.160411
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.86.244.196]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <FD9BCDEDC546054BA459AA7658DF4F53@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/WwrkSRZEHSljE3psegKgG5Zna1I>
Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc.all@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Teas] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc-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: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 14:50:27 -0000

Hi Christian,

Thank you for the thorough review of the document.

We have posted following revision that addresses your comments:

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc-06

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc-06


Thanks,

Rakesh (for authors and contributors)





On 2016-12-07, 7:44 AM, "Christian Hopps" <chopps@chopps.org> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The
>Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as
>they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special
>request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs.
>For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
>​http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
>
>Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would
>be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call
>comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by
>updating the draft.
>
>Document: draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-resource-sharing-proc-05
>Reviewer: Christian Hopps
>Review Date: 2016-12-06
>IETF LC End Date: Unknown
>Intended Status: Informational
>
>Summary:
>========
>
>    This document is basically ready for publication. It has 1 minor
>    issue and some nits that should be considered prior to publication.
>
>Comments:
>=========
>
>    I found the draft fairly well written, easy to understand with good
>    references. I believe that after fixing the minor issue and nits,
>    this informational draft will be ready for publication. This was the
>    first TEAS draft I have reviewed, and as a result it may mean that
>    my review is less in depth than others.
>
>Major Issues:
>=============
>
>    No major issues found.
>
>
>Minor Issues:
>=============
>
>    1. 3rd paragraph: First sentence doesn't parse for me, i.e., I can't figure
>       out what this means:
>
>           "In GMPLS end-to-end recovery schemes generally considered,
>           restoration..."
>
>       Is it trying to say:
>
>           "When considering GMPLS end-to-end recovery schemes, the
>           restoration..."?
>
>       or
>
>           "Generally GMPLS end-to-end recovery schemes have the restoration..."
>
>       or
>
>            ...?
>
>Nits:
>=====
>
>    Most of these are due to missing articles (i.e., the/a/an). I may
>    have missed some.
>
>    1. 2nd paragraph:
>          Change: "ASSOCIATION object" to "an ASSOCIATION object"
>
>    1. 4th paragraph:
>        Add a comma after "teardown"
>        Change: "including following" to "including the following"
>
>    1. 6th paragraph:
>        Change: "ASSOCIATION object with" to "an ASSOCIATION object with"
>        Change: "Procedure" to "The procedure"
>        Change: "ASSOCIATION object is" to "an ASSOCIATION object is"
>
>    2.1. 1st paragrah:
>        Change: ", working LSP" to: ", a working LSP"
>        Change:
>            "Unlike protection LSP, restoration LSP is signaled per need basis."
>        to:
>            "Unlike a protection LSP, a restoration LSP is signaled on a per
>            need basis."
>
>    2.1. 2nd paragraph:
>        Change: "Typically when failure is recovered"
>        to: "Typically when the failure has recovered"
>        Change: "restoration LSP" to: "the restoration LSP"
>        Change: "and torn down, while" to: "and is torn down while"
>
>    2.2. 2nd paragraph:
>        Change ", working LSP on" to: ", a working LSP on"
>        Change "and protecting LSP on" to: "and a protecting LSP on"
>        Change:
>            "Nonetheless, restoration LSP with working LSP it is restoring as
>            well as restoration LSP with protecting LSP it is restoring can
>            share network resources.
>        to:
>            "Nonetheless, a restoration LSP with the working LSP it is restoring
>            as well as a restoration LSP with the protecting LSP it is restoring
>            can share network resources.
>
>    2.2. 3nd paragraph:
>        Change: "restoration LSP" to "a restoration LSP"
>
>    2.2. 4th paragraph:
>        Change: "either working" to: "either a working"
>
>    2.2. 5th paragraph:
>        Change: "either working" to: "either a working"
>
>    3.2. 4th paragraph:
>        Change: ", node may" to: ", a node may"
>
>    3.2. 5th paragraph:
>        Change: "reroute procedure" to: "the reroute procedure"
>        Change: "rerouting process" to: "the rerouting process"
>
>    3.2. Table 1, Category C1, 2nd paragraph:
>    3.2. Table 1, Category C2, 2nd paragraph:
>    3.2. Table 1, Category C3, 2nd paragraph:
>        In each change "This type of nodes needs" to:
>            "This type of node needs".
>        or
>            "These types of nodes need".
>
>    3.3. 2nd paragraph:
>        Change "with working" to "with a working"
>
>    3.3. 3rd paragraph:
>        Change "with working" to "with a working"
>
>    3.3.1. 2nd paragraph:
>        Change "has few" to "has a few".
>
>    3.3.1. 3rd from last paragraph:
>        Change "in corner cases completion guarantee" to
>        "in corner cases a completion guarantee"
>
>    3.3.2. 1st paragraph:
>        Change "head-end chooses" to "the head-end chooses"