[trill] Routing directorate QA review of draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Mon, 27 June 2016 00:58 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E063F12D1D2; Sun, 26 Jun 2016 17:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.702
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 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_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 YauNgao7lAfM; Sun, 26 Jun 2016 17:58:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD20312D1C2; Sun, 26 Jun 2016 17:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90067245C3A; Sun, 26 Jun 2016 17:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=1.tigertech; t=1466989111; bh=EG46cD4d9hvfKGmc3xzzy3N/nxhBfa/Mme8d0bUyx8A=; h=To:Cc:From:Subject:Date:From; b=RR2mwDzDwFA17RZpj/OCxp80vXnUQ8Jky5yQaaLBkGC8CPA+23wgcxL04vXu/txwL 13ws41no+sIvlyRKQXNGiAwOlfnpeRy/NhlOv0Wnxto2pev7vbRxNUmmzbItfFYzrv vP7KoY6+HaMuF5mAFUBLS5ySVD6myEDIxmpf5pwE=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at maila2.tigertech.net
Received: from Joels-MacBook-Pro.local (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0645D245C23; Sun, 26 Jun 2016 17:58:30 -0700 (PDT)
To: "trill-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <trill-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis@ietf.org
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <65c03289-d719-25ed-60fa-6f954edf2c5a@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 20:58:30 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/0xAJWhYGHUb5AxfMG4JyDxe78gA>
Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, "trill@ietf.org" <trill@ietf.org>
Subject: [trill] Routing directorate QA review of draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <trill.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/trill/>
List-Post: <mailto:trill@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 00:58:36 -0000

This is a QA review, intended to provide an additional perspective, 
requested by the TRIL chairs and Routing ADs.
The reviewer understands that the WG last call has completed, and hopes 
that this review will prove helpful to the working group.
[For clarity, the above is written before performing the review.]

This document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC.


Major: N/A

Minor: N/A

Nits:
     Section 2.2 base has two bullet items.  the first appears to be a 
subset of the second.  Is this deliberate?

     The counter-example at the end of the second paragraph of section 
2.4 seems to be missing some limitation that would explain it.  (It is 
possible this is more obvious to a reader who is more conversant with 
TRILL, but there does seem to be something missing.)

Editorial:
     In section 10.4 defining the FGL-VLAN Mapping Bitmap APPsub-TLV, 
the diagram calls the fifth field "Starting FGL".  The text below that 
refers to it the field simply as "FGL".  I believe the text should also 
name it "Starting FGL".


Side note: I really appreciate the thorough additional explanations as 
to the reasons various actions are safe or unsafe.  Thank you.

Yours,
Joel M. Halpern