IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com> Fri, 22 December 2017 07:48 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 709BB1241F8; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 23:48:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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_NONE=-0.0001, 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 uE5sLDdfGwCa; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 23:48:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl0-x236.google.com (mail-pl0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::236]) (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 CCA6F1201FA; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 23:48:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl0-x236.google.com with SMTP id g2so12497764pli.8; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 23:48:14 -0800 (PST)
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=A9DWbM11uC5C2gH81MTs7RLnzzXgEZh/Intf2vScQIk=; b=h4kuoRk4XhVqzn+VwMUXIozmqMiizqhV/7GUk2GrW+EX4QQzqQ18kKoq0slB4Lj4kj XQgX+AU0IqWfetAe2h69hoKljkQIjYYjfRsxPEcgaDkpIuHLfNDdGnsv4izuTbZPfeXQ dOM8Lg3fEpdY4EK9J6KJErtz4D77t/3xVd1ZDcp7lN/1I/e6RAO/tsK3LNljuZRNtXvL Tmnox4sxXdD9s9Tvr4FFl6h9J/8JQLWreFncrRWXF35s+3k7jVD9YafbPAtJ6LjsIO4L hdYL9HxfT9rRADF0NugATamtMDG/424tPZU5smxD+pIrsO6GTCG9PXABdC7jQyNSNMZE cwVw==
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=A9DWbM11uC5C2gH81MTs7RLnzzXgEZh/Intf2vScQIk=; b=ZTIgHRC1NEIDf9X0RmIY+D+d3s30QSt03q+yJVr170SyP6ePnDr1lFybwUwpiH2QR9 k1jKNhVojXUA/HEo1WfNINBCFxsiy4L9xny3J+DnPjenw3xwjniTqMNJeFme5/aBrafq lPq+CfPhCO7i27cdMtP/fRgxCwZ3YKwYzuQtkdoWEnp7qH+wppFhltLOc+Ekw5DzueXy dQmpoXCDzTSXjbNi8jGD7k+8ota6UWtJyb6JXAgrj6XsDH+Vt7RoYPVRXCPHW+BB/P0y UQWwX+xB8ZgTUHsp0cA2j1IsFVTZD3NJLoYNcbH3XDrY0C6uMHHUVSQgGCZ3/J1ELAcQ 1ddg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mIihoy4Z0JZmPXXlQyOuu4sZ+0sA9aGHXg01gdJKuiPNLjxlHmg ZQ+/sLyXbQEEnPnzMdRGEkx+s4Lf8Ejax59cRac=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBot5BM7/zNX5xHyrjVzYDEwbrW+lQiyTkVjYl6Do88D6H8e642rlFJFd6ux9bPMgYOpbEDjZSp3wKFs8yuz+t7g=
X-Received: by 10.159.194.204 with SMTP id u12mr13451474plz.191.1513928894438; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 23:48:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.170.203 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 23:48:14 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <7F5E6E3A-04DA-4960-94C2-7E66F960C426@cisco.com>
References: <150634961899.27517.2676098033688714820.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+YzgTuB3XCgw03Vsx8dHH2NeQEeitdJSV0Na_+CZ6QJS4QJpA@mail.gmail.com> <7F5E6E3A-04DA-4960-94C2-7E66F960C426@cisco.com>
From: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 02:48:14 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+YzgTsegZ46VwCa3UMwkAHwRp2EsdifXnNprD5U3znMhPZYCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec@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="089e082c07ccf7e3790560e90918"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/xRTSA4ol0U_u-dXlLRkHQQtLkZU>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Alvaro Retana'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: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 07:48:16 -0000

Alvaro, Hi!

Please go through the Gen-Art Review thread. We concluded on that thread
that this document does not update RFC2961. Please go through the latest
rev (-08) and let us know if there are any further concerns with
progressing this document.

Regards,
-Pavan

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Alvaro Retana (aretana) <aretana@cisco.com>
wrote:

> Pavan:
>
>
>
> Hi!
>
>
>
> Thanks for the update!
>
>
>
> Maybe a nit, but I think it would be good to explicitly state that the
> rfc2961 recommendation by themselves won’t do much.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Alvaro.
>
>
>
> On 9/27/17, 11:19 PM, "Vishnu Pavan Beeram" <vishnupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> (1) This document seems to do two things: make a series of rfc2961
> recommendations, and introduce a couple of new techniques.  What is not
> clear
> to me is whether the first part is independent of the second.  Will the
> implementation of Section 2.1. ("RFC2961 Specific" Recommendations) provide
> scaling benefits on their own (i.e. without the new techniques)?  If so,
> please
> add some text (maybe in the Introduction) to indicate that.
>
>
>
> [VPB] The implementation of the RFC2961 specific recommendations (Section
> 2 in rev -07) alone will not provide any significant improvement to the
> existing scaling numbers.
>
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email