Re: [trill] comments on this draft://RE: WG Last Call - draft-ietf-trill-oam-fm

Hi Frank

Sincere apologies, this fell through cracks. Will answer no later than Monday 3/31 PST.

Thanks for he comments,
Tissa

-----Original Message-----
From: trill [mailto:trill-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Xialiang (Frank)
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 8:41 PM
To: Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir); Norman Finn (nfinn); Samer Salam (ssalam); Deepak Kumar (dekumar); Donald Eastlake; aldrin.ietf@gmail.com; Liyizhou
Cc: Donald Eastlake; trill@ietf.org
Subject: [trill] comments on this draft://RE: WG Last Call - draft-ietf-trill-oam-fm

Hi draft authors,
I have posted my comments on this draft about two weeks ago as followed, but I get no response until now.
So, I send this email again to remind you all. Hoping to get your response.
Thanks!

B.R.
Frank

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xialiang (Frank)
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 3:20 PM
> To: 'Donald Eastlake'
> Cc: trill@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [trill] WG Last Call - draft-ietf-trill-oam-fm
> 
> Hi draft authors,
> After reviewing this draft, I think it's a very important framework 
> draft and organized well. I support it with several comments below:
> 1. Several typos:
> 1) header format of section 8, section 9.2 are not correct. Similar 
> problem also exists other place in the draft;
> 2) Suggest to change the order between section 8 and section 9;
> 3) TRILL OAM Specific TLVs names in section 8.4.2 are not consistent 
> with the following draft;
> 4) In section 9.2.1, "The TRILL OAM Version TLV" should be "The TRILL 
> OAM Application Identifier TLV"?
> 
> 2. In section 1, is reference to [TRLOAMFRM] ok because it's not a WG 
> draft or RFC?
> 
> 3. In section 12:
> 1) what's is the main goal of it? Detecting flow fault or path fault 
> of multi-path (e.g. ECMP)?
> 2) What's the reason MEP transmits 4 CCM messages per each flow?
> 3) The numbered CCM messages possibly arrive remote MEP out of order 
> because the multi-path characteristics of TRILL;
> 4) Even if CCM messages can arrive remote MEP in order, the fault 
> detecting scheme seems to be not correct totally and will give fault 
> judgement. For example, when  MEP-B does not receive CCM messages of 3,4,5,6.
> 
> B.R.
> Frank
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: trill [mailto:trill-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Donald 
> > Eastlake
> > Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2014 2:31 AM
> > To: trill@ietf.org
> > Subject: [trill] WG Last Call - draft-ietf-trill-oam-fm
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > As announced at the TRILL WG meeting today, this starts a WG Last 
> > Call on draft-ietf-trill-oam-fm-02.txt running through March 24th.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Donald and Jon
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > trill mailing list
> > trill@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill

_______________________________________________
trill mailing list
trill@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill