Re: [Teas] I-D Action: draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11.txt

[Gyan Mishra <[e-mail]>]

Hi Adrian

Just checking if you had any questions related to the feedback on my
review.

Thank you

Gyan

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 11:52 PM Gyan Mishra <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Adrian
>
> Attached is the review of 3272bis version 11  word document with comments
> along the side.
>
> I added some verbiage in the abstract & introduction section describing
> the three operator environments that exist 1. Public internet, 2. Private
> domain with external customers, 3. Internal corporate intranet domain
> Throughout the draft I changed "internet traffic engineering" to "traffic
> engineering" as there are three unique use cases of traffic engineering
> which I described each in detail.
>
> Also once "traffic engineering (TE) referred to traffic engineering as
> "TE"  is noted I believe my comment is in the intro section that we should
> not have to spell TE out explicitly each time throughout the draft except
> when a sentence starts with "traffic engineering".
>
> Some minor comments throughout the draft.
>
> Under the protection section I mentioned local protection which I think
> should be mentioned LFA, RLFA, TI-LFA.
>
> Section 6.2 - I had some comments related to ECMP that if you would like I
> can do a write-up on ECMP.
>
> Under 4.1.16 SR-MPLS is mentioned but not SRv6 so I thought it may be
> worthwhile to mention SRv6 as uses SR-TE steering even though not mpls
> based but as another form of steering using IPv6 data plane.
>
> Lastly,
>
> I noticed Multicast was not mentioned under IETF projects section or
> anywhere else in the draft. I can add some verbiage to a section and talk
> about P2MP TE & replication sid.  I did not comment on this in the draft as
> no multicast section exists.
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Gyan
>
> On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 11:26 AM Gyan Mishra <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Adrian
>>
>> I see you published a version 12.  I went through all of MEDs updates in
>> version 11 and ensured that my updates are mutually exclusive no overlap of
>> MEDs updates.
>>
>> I built my updated on version 11.  I am almost done and will send out
>> tomorrow night.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Gyan
>>
>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:00 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Adrian,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the replies. Here is some few follow-up points:
>>>
>>> * s/within the control plane or by controllers/within the control or
>>> management plane
>>>
>>> * "I'm not clear about the term "resource-based access control". Do you
>>> mean "policing"? If so, yes. Policing is mentioned just two sentences later"
>>>
>>> I actually meant resource-based admission control. This is now covered
>>> by the new section you added. Thanks.
>>>
>>> * " The word "economically" is, I think, giving you a different meaning
>>> to what is intended. I think the word is not intended to just mean
>>> "financially economical", but also to mean "not wasteful or profligate."
>>> This is similar to "efficient", but not the same. In this context,
>>> "economically" would certainly apply to power use, money, and any other
>>> resource.
>>> I spent a little time trying to think of an equivalent word (because if
>>> it is causing you unrest, it will do the same for other readers), but I was
>>> unable to think of one.":
>>>
>>> The concern I had is that the observed behavior is conditioned by the
>>> metrics/attributes/information that can be disseminated and acted upon.
>>> Optimizing the forwarding with a set of metrics as inputs does not
>>> guarantee that the overall forwarding is economically-optimized. That's why
>>> I provided the example of power-consumption. Such optimization is not
>>> currently supported at the level of a network (despite that some
>>> optimization can be made at the node/card level).
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Med
>>>
>>> > -----Message d'origine-----
>>> > De : Adrian Farrel [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>> > Envoyé : samedi 15 mai 2021 19:40
>>> > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN <[e-mail]>
>>> > Objet : RE: [Teas] I-D Action: draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11.txt
>>> >
>>> > Here's the file.
>>> >
>>> > Many thanks for looking at this.
>>> >
>>> > Adrian
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]>
>>> > Sent: 15 May 2021 18:11
>>> > To: '[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>;
>>> > '[e-mail]' <[e-mail]>
>>> > Cc: 'TEAS WG Chairs' <[e-mail]>
>>> > Subject: RE: [Teas] I-D Action: draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11.txt
>>> >
>>> > Hi Med,
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for all of your comments.
>>> >
>>> > Nearly everything is accepted and included.
>>> >
>>> > Not sure the best way to respond to your Word file, so I embedded my
>>> > responses and I'll send it to you under separate cover (no need to
>>> > spam the mailing list).
>>> >
>>> > There'll be a -12 along soon to capture your improvements.
>>> >
>>> > Best,
>>> > Adrian
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
>>> > Sent: 03 May 2021 15:49
>>> > To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>>> > Cc: 'TEAS WG Chairs' <[e-mail]>
>>> > Subject: RE: [Teas] I-D Action: draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11.txt
>>> >
>>> > Hi Adrian, all,
>>> >
>>> > FWIW, you may find some comments at:
>>> > * pdf:
>>> > https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/blob/master/draft-
>>> > ietf-teas
>>> > -rfc3272bis-11-rev%20Med.pdf
>>> > * doc:
>>> > https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-
>>> > ietf-teas-
>>> > rfc3272bis-11-rev%20Med.docx
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> > Med
>>> >
>>> > > -----Message d'origine-----
>>> > > De : Teas [mailto:[e-mail]] De la part de Adrian
>>> > Farrel
>>> > > Envoyé : mercredi 7 avril 2021 21:24 À : [e-mail] Cc : 'TEAS
>>> > WG
>>> > > Chairs' <[e-mail]> Objet : Re: [Teas] I-D Action:
>>> > > draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11.txt
>>> > >
>>> > > With this version I have filled in the remaining TBDs:
>>> > > - small section on intent-based network
>>> > > - small section on multi-layer TE (thanks, Lou, for the suggestion)
>>> > > - change log from 3272
>>> > >
>>> > > As far as I'm concerned this document is complete modulo review
>>> > > comments.
>>> > >
>>> > > It *really* needs review, but I can't force you!
>>> > > Maybe you can look at the sections of special interest to you?
>>> > > Maybe the original Design Team could take another look?
>>> > >
>>> > > Otherwise: time for WG last call?
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks,
>>> > > Adrian
>>> > >
>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > From: I-D-Announce <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of
>>> > > [e-mail]
>>> > > Sent: 07 April 2021 19:25
>>> > > To: [e-mail]
>>> > > Cc: [e-mail]
>>> > > Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11.txt
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>>> > > directories.
>>> > > This draft is a work item of the Traffic Engineering Architecture
>>> > and
>>> > > Signaling WG of the IETF.
>>> > >
>>> > >         Title           : Overview and Principles of Internet
>>> > Traffic
>>> > > Engineering
>>> > >         Author          : Adrian Farrel
>>> > >     Filename        : draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11.txt
>>> > >     Pages           : 91
>>> > >     Date            : 2021-04-07
>>> > >
>>> > > Abstract:
>>> > >    This document describes the principles of traffic engineering
>>> > (TE)
>>> > > in
>>> > >    the Internet.  The document is intended to promote better
>>> > >    understanding of the issues surrounding traffic engineering in
>>> > IP
>>> > >    networks and the networks that support IP networking, and to
>>> > > provide
>>> > >    a common basis for the development of traffic engineering
>>> > >    capabilities for the Internet.  The principles, architectures,
>>> > and
>>> > >    methodologies for performance evaluation and performance
>>> > > optimization
>>> > >    of operational networks are also discussed.
>>> > >
>>> > >    This work was first published as RFC 3272 in May 2002.  This
>>> > > document
>>> > >    obsoletes RFC 3272 by making a complete update to bring the text
>>> > in
>>> > >    line with best current practices for Internet traffic
>>> > engineering
>>> > > and
>>> > >    to include references to the latest relevant work in the IETF.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis/
>>> > >
>>> > > There are also htmlized versions available at:
>>> > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11
>>> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11
>>> > >
>>> > > A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>> > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis-11
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>>> > > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>>> > > tools.ietf.org.
>>> > >
>>> > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > I-D-Announce mailing list
>>> > > [e-mail]
>>> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>>> > > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or
>>> > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>>> > >
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > Teas mailing list
>>> > > [e-mail]
>>> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>>> >
>>> > _____________________________________________________________________
>>> > _______
>>> > _____________________________________________
>>> >
>>> > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
>>> > confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses,
>>> > exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message
>>> > par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi
>>> > que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles
>>> > d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete
>>> > altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>>> >
>>> > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or
>>> > privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not
>>> > be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>>> > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender
>>> > and delete this message and its attachments.
>>> > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have
>>> > been modified, changed or falsified.
>>> > Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
>>> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>>> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez
>>> recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>>> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
>>> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>>> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme
>>> ou falsifie. Merci.
>>>
>>> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
>>> information that may be protected by law;
>>> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>>> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and
>>> delete this message and its attachments.
>>> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have
>>> been modified, changed or falsified.
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Teas mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>>>
>> --
>>
>> <http://www.verizon.com/>
>>
>> *Gyan Mishra*
>>
>> *Network Solutions A**rchitect *
>>
>> *Email [e-mail] <[e-mail]>*
>>
>>
>>
>> *M 301 502-1347*
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> <http://www.verizon.com/>
>
> *Gyan Mishra*
>
> *Network Solutions A**rchitect *
>
> *Email [e-mail] <[e-mail]>*
>
>
>
> *M 301 502-1347*
>
> --

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email [e-mail] <[e-mail]>*



*M 301 502-1347*