Re: [trill] AD review of draft-ietf-trill-over-ip-14

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Sat, 24 February 2018 18:58 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1rcYshnGdEZMSGzsL4YbSHBMHRtAT9=LjSBMJQU2m6Tp7w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG4d1rdiOnQg2OVBPyd7gvup4pv3yNPr2YOAkmGKjz6GEd54HQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEGNm0+Qmh20CMACn2pQj3OwFJrYBU7TP_8PV0-OMtUWbg@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4d1rcYshnGdEZMSGzsL4YbSHBMHRtAT9=LjSBMJQU2m6Tp7w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2018 13:57:50 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEEgWM47=mGpBeEyZk7bhUm+3FJsUfxkHKYRkxb1LvhCtg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Cc: trill IETF mailing list <trill@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-trill-over-ip@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e08e55ceb6b8a220565f9db65"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/yOeuMqTiUK6Dc71nNdZRr176g_o>
Subject: Re: [trill] AD review of draft-ietf-trill-over-ip-14
Precedence: list

Hi Alia,

The just posted version -15 attempts to resolve your comments.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:39 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Donald,
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Alia,
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 6:55 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> As is traditional, I have done my AD review of
>>> draft-ietf-trill-over-ip-14. First I would like to thank the authors -
>>> Donald, Margaret, Mingui, and Dacheng, as well as the reviewers for their
>>> work on this document.
>>>
>>> I did find one minor issue (below) and would recommend a spell-checker
>>> to catch several minor typos.  I will send this to IETF Last Call and place
>>> it on the IESG telechat on March 8.
>>>
>>> Minor:
>>>
>>> 1) In Sec 5.2: " An adjacency can be formed between two TRILL over IP
>>> transport ports if the intersection of the sets of encapsulation methods
>>> they support is not null. If that intersection is null, then no adjacency
>>> is formed."
>>> Given that Sec 5.0 says that the native encapsulation MUST be supported,
>>> how can the set be null?  Is this the set of encapsulation methods other
>>> than the native encapsulation?  Please clarify.
>>>
>>
>> Unless the port is configured to use some other encapsulation X for all
>> types of traffic, then a port has to "support" UDP for the low bandwidth of
>> Hellos and other adjacency establishment PDUs. This is different from
>> advertising support for UDP which means a willingness to use it for data
>> traffic and LSPs. This needs to be clarified. Maybe "limited support"
>> versus "full support".
>>
>
> Thanks, that would work.  The draft currently doesn't indicate limited
> support and the previous paragraph indicates that signaling nothing assumes
> "native encapsulation".
>
> Regards,
> Alia
>
> Thanks,
>> Donald
>> ===============================
>>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 <(508)%20333-2270> (cell)
>>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=155+Beaver+Street,+Milford,+MA+01757+USA&entry=gmail&source=g>
>>  d3e3e3@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alia
>>>
>>
>>
>

[trill] AD review of draft-ietf-trill-over-ip-14 Alia Atlas
Re: [trill] AD review of draft-ietf-trill-over-ip… Donald Eastlake
Re: [trill] AD review of draft-ietf-trill-over-ip… Alia Atlas
Re: [trill] AD review of draft-ietf-trill-over-ip… Donald Eastlake