[trill] Suresh Krishnan's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-irb-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Suresh Krishnan" <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Wed, 29 June 2016 23:08 UTC

Return-Path: <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: trill@ietf.org
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D65912D0B1; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:08:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Suresh Krishnan" <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.25.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20160629230835.30452.44953.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:08:35 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/LRprzC150OHKWGxmJa7f1e-hh8k>
Cc: d3e3e3@gmail.com, trill-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-trill-irb@ietf.org, trill@ietf.org
Subject: [trill] Suresh Krishnan's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-irb-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 23:08:35 -0000

Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-trill-irb-13: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-irb/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

* Section 6 has a few errors that need to get fixed before this document
goes forward. e.g. It is not clear what a "192.0.2.0/32" subnet means
especially since the only host shown to be on the subnet 192.0.2.2 cannot
obviously fall inside the subnet range. The /32 needs to be replaced with
something shorter depending on what the authors/WG intended (say a /24).
* RB2 seems to be advertising ES2s IPv4 address 198.51.100.2/32 instead
of the prefix of the subnet while RB1 seems to be advertising the the
IPv4 prefix of the ES1 subnet. One of these is wrong. Not sure which one
is intended.
* What is the rationale for using a /112 IPv6 prefix for numbering an
IPv6 link with hosts? Things like SLAAC (RFC4862) will not work in such
links. Is there a reason the authors want to use a longer than /64?
Please read RFC7421 for advantages of using a /64 instead and to find out
what things break if you do not use a /64.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 5: What does "Layer 2 routing" mean in this context?
Sections 7.3 & 7.4: What is the point of including these sub-TLVs if no
prefix is being advertised? (The Total Length=0 case specified in the
document)