Re: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework-04

Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 20 April 2020 09:06 UTC

Return-Path: <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D82283A094E; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:06:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 hkNWoJmsFkDk; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe29.google.com (mail-vs1-xe29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1DD43A0829; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe29.google.com with SMTP id t189so5494672vst.7; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Jtl0tL5ClUMKxFdKU9AFa7945qoIRWGxYJHgQDdNe/Y=; b=ggC4OMtsXaq88kXg7D+ghf7dzXN6nHw+LsVm60uNq6B7Ye0vcJDwKgUx+POcee2ncd cNyLu75hgfsjYS/bNysltUpAh4eKCytDRasXDgmNz1QfZw7Hv9T0bGqyW/6EJMgUZ7Au FXcIenl15bv82s6cHzHlHUglx7IQEbJP4KYuDDARs7RZF2yPrBfyR6xjNBLCyfmWj48l guVLUFKGFL/s1+wp8c5JusG3G6gIFFoEQufiHv54SxZYlxviYS47V9o9CzVm0Y5dAuHO ZGaV3PqljJp8H2PS7wqNt7nGwBKz0RBHw5wAg1eiqfGQYaZp49YAobGt4tjHk6EbE4j+ Jp1Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Jtl0tL5ClUMKxFdKU9AFa7945qoIRWGxYJHgQDdNe/Y=; b=irwWtjx4/0Gqo4aOkQKjHNxfaixEReckQw+VUXK5Tv5HctE2V0hVk2D7FyDSdK5A5G zFfkkn/HnU0BYzpUcJpZcX0iTdzSvQhu5m88Mb1TIDYzGugM6bP+i0k4I7Jq7gNCc2kp UR886Ih62mpL9GYjPUYF13ln/2Ef4Br6wdckXL1TLzyRdfmEKqwcr7p/gbBn5sOyx2Z7 BXrqps2PWUfrVmP5n7ZvxXHKDM4Vwczg03KMCMiDvOV5QYge/AuWKqbnffPCZIVgiPaD RODUujvCrXfaRkMufI+r0Tka3gDRRvkfo7FOw9cNkRtZ/B8o3unP6t0x4ypt9pqPoKLS nrBQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubegydFmVXoIroltAu8iusb4l9NxZtU3g//RpsR3MJKN7jCKp+z dxgx22SuQuKy473dwvOA0pB21c7xf5pxKcE/uVc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJEtlkvTD3TKX7kDXQSHeVHQ/DU6nq0CD54cXLIigDoJQ4Y8jBrJ5MmCwDCcLgnMRfXvpTJKYtn1mkVrpytLjU=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:d606:: with SMTP id n6mr3167224vsj.86.1587373524506; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <158624986177.7879.15272885885261397703@ietfa.amsl.com> <AM0PR0702MB3603A74841E553B7BCA636C1ACDB0@AM0PR0702MB3603.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM0PR0702MB3603A74841E553B7BCA636C1ACDB0@AM0PR0702MB3603.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 02:05:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAK044QC_ZS6_yTgrP+uYBnbqjnKAL+FKR63ggoSM95eN8Y=PA@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bal=C3=A1zs_Varga_A?= <balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com>
Cc: "tsv-art@ietf.org" <tsv-art@ietf.org>, "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>, "detnet@ietf.org" <detnet@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework.all@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000ddbdc05a3b533d6"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/bCwkrmI2ITUFpVj9pnxnmSjrJo8>
Subject: Re: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework-04
X-BeenThere: tsv-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Review Team <tsv-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsv-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsv-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 09:06:40 -0000

Hi Balázs,

Thanks for the clarification.
I think it might be good if you can provide simple texts in the draft to
provide these info for references.
--
Yoshi

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 8:10 AM Balázs Varga A <balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com>
wrote:

> Hi Yoshi,
>
> Many thanks for the review.
> Regarding your comment on "conflict of the flow ID or wrap-around of the
> sequence number".
> Yes, these are important aspects in DetNet.
>
> Yes, flow ID must be unique in order to identify packets belonging to the
> DetNet flow.
> This must be ensured by the control and/or management plane. DetNet WG was
> re-chartered
> recently to focus on these planes as well. In data plane drafts we have
> dedicated a section
> to collect " Controller Plane (Management and Control) Considerations".
>
> Regarding sequence number, wrap-around events are flow characteristics and
> network
> dependent. The data plane technology specific documents ensures that the
> sequence number
> space does not wrap whilst packets are in flight ( see Section 4.1. and
> 4.2.1 in
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-detnet-mpls ).
>
> I hope that clarifies your comments.
>
> Many Thanks
> Bala'zs
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yoshifumi Nishida via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 10:58 AM
> To: tsv-art@ietf.org
> Cc: last-call@ietf.org; detnet@ietf.org;
> draft-ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework.all@ietf.org
> Subject: Tsvart last call review of
> draft-ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework-04
>
> Reviewer: Yoshifumi Nishida
> Review result: Ready with Nits
>
> This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review
> team's ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were
> written primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the
> document's authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and
> also to the IETF discussion list for information.
>
> When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
> review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
> tsv-art@ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.
>
> Summary: Ready with Nits.
>
> This document is well-written as an informational RFC. I don't see any
> technical issues related to transport, but it might be better to clarify
> the following minor point.
>
> The draft allows DetNet data plane to carry flow ID and sequence number as
> metadata. But, aren't there any potential risks for the conflict of the
> flow ID or wrap-around of the sequence number? (especially for explicit
> case) It might be better to state which module should care if it's out of
> scope for the draft or to clarify there is no risk against them.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Yoshi
>
>
>
>