Re: [trill] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis-04: (with COMMENT)

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Donald,

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Donald Eastlake <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Spencer,
>
> Thanks for the comments. See below
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Spencer Dawkins
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis-04: No Objection
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I had trouble parsing "output it to or queue it for" (this occurs twice
> > in the sentence).
> >
> >    However, it does not output it to or queue it for that link,
> >    although, if appropriate (for example, the frame is multi-
> >    destination), it may output it to or queue it for other links.
>
> It's kind of verbose but I believe that actual output port
> implementations typically provide for directly streaming out a packet
> even as other parts of the packet are still arriving at the switch,
> particularly in cut-through routing, or just sticking it in a queue
> for output later if the port is busy. Do you have any suggestion for
> better wording?
>

I was thinking that

    However, it does not output it to, or queue it for, that link,
    although, if appropriate (for example, the frame is multi-
   destination), it may output it to, or queue it for, other links.

might be clearer.

If the RFC Editor removes the commas, of course, you can slap me in Chicago
;-)

Spencer

>
> > I don't think the text is incorrect, just awkward. Perhaps commas would
> > help?
> >
> > In these three subsection titles,
> >
> >    3.2.1 Change Optimization One
> >
> >    3.2.2 Change Optimization Two
> >
> >    3.2.3 Settling Detection Optimization
> >
> > I found the title for 3.2.3 helpful, but not 3.2.1 or 3.2.2. Is it
> > possible to come up with more descriptive titles?
>
> That's a reasonable point. Maybe
>
>    3.2.1 Optimization for Change to Lower Priority
>
>    3.2.2 Optimization for Change to Priority Only
>
>
> > I found
> >
> >    For robustness, a TRILL switch sends a number of copies of a Port-
> >    Shutdown messages configurable from one to three, which defaults to
> >    two copies, at a configurable interval, which defaults to 20
> >    milliseconds (see Section 6.6).
> >
> > difficult to parse. Perhaps
> >
> >    For robustness, a TRILL switch sends a configurable number of copies
> >    of Port-Shutdown messages separated by a configurable interval. The
> > default
> >    number of copies is two, although this can be configured as one copy
> >    or as three copies, and the default interval is 20 milliseconds
> >    (see Section 6.6).
> >
> > ?
>
> Sure, that seems like an improvement. Might also be good to say "time
> interval" instead of just "interval".
>
> Thanks,
> Donald
> ===============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
>  [e-mail]
>