Re: [trill] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-05

Haoweiguo <> Wed, 22 June 2016 06:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C063112D10D; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 23:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.646
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.646 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R5DL0-WBMq9e; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 23:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E26F12D0C5; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 23:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (EHLO ([]) by (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CRG71922; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 06:26:38 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 07:26:34 +0100
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 14:26:29 +0800
From: Haoweiguo <>
To: Donald Eastlake <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [trill] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-05
Thread-Index: AQHRy+9QbBWB8jQf/0WtoAhJG3oHKJ/1BeG1
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 06:26:29 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DD5FC8DE455C3348B94340C0AB551733502C5AB2nkgeml513mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090203.576A2FA0.000E, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: bca371dc9ef664e9de62ff4e79007871
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [trill] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-05
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 06:26:46 -0000

Thanks Donald. Will accept all your suggestions and will update it ASAP.


From: Donald Eastlake []
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 6:15
Subject: [trill] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-05


As the document shepherd I have done a careful review of this document and have the following comments:

This draft uses "CE" and expands it as "Classic Ethernet"; however, I
believe we have decided to use the expansion "Customer Equipment"
that, for example, is used in RFC 7379.

The draft says that BUM traffic is unicast encapsulated and is sent to
a central node that SHOULD be a tree root. It would be good to say a
few words about why it "SHOULD". Perhaps something like "because
distribution tree roots are normally chosen to be high capacity core
RBridges with many high bandwidth adjacencies".

At the bottom of page 5 there appears to be a small garble where some
text was dropped. Looking back at version -04, it looks like most of
the problem is one line of text being dropped.

In TRILL it is possible for an RBridge to hold multiple nicknames and
be the distribution tree root for multiple trees. The draft should say
something about what to do in that case. Presumably, to avoid
unnecessary re-ordering of BUM traffic each R-nickname should direct
traffic to one distribution tree. Also, a centralized node could hold
multiple nicknames that it advertised as R-nicknames so perhaps the
spreading over centralized nodes in Section 8 should be a spreading
over R-nicknames. This would enable a network manager to direct more
traffic to one centralized node and less to other centralized nodes
which they might want to do if one centralized node was larger and
more capable than others.

In Section 11, it says that the C-nickname is set on each edge
RBridges which could be a bit confusing. It sounds a bit like they are
setting it on their own nickname. Should this say something more like it is
set on the psuedo-nickname for each edge group.

I also have a number of minor editorial suggestions which I am sending to
the authors.

 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA<>