[apps-discuss] Apps Directorate Review of draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-metrics-08

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Wed, 18 April 2012 10:03 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E1E21F860B; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 03:03:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.047, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NSjCbAm48qpf; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 03:03:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EC6021F864C; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 03:03:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=lear@cisco.com; l=4101; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1334743427; x=1335953027; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject; bh=tHyI61e7MkncBQIVdBtxG/96hJaIc363xQ73a47fVxA=; b=HpwJeYW0XWvMAQjhCqvKvay5RTeEp5cWdcMWsWid1MgWiMoMkZFajxVW hdHPFfWwNvgFrm12TkQRD5JuWBBXzBUpQrLimAijAmiVAkkKOCRUc6lqV tl5P30IJ5hn6Zmd+c9gnEUVMcVyUuo/1p6Gi+H2vfddVxtyrjiTak8b87 g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAD+Qjk+Q/khL/2dsb2JhbABEhWarV4EHgiIBEFUBHxANFgsCCwMCAQIBSwEMAQcBAR6HbQuZWY0QkxqPUIEYBJVvgRGNQIFpgmk
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.75,441,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="71155034"
Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Apr 2012 10:03:46 +0000
Received: from ams3-vpn-dhcp4471.cisco.com (ams3-vpn-dhcp4471.cisco.com [10.61.81.118]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q3IA3kt3024445; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:03:46 GMT
Message-ID: <4F8E9182.5030509@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:03:46 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-metrics.all@tools.ietf.org
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030105070703080107000604"
Cc: 'IESG' <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: [apps-discuss] Apps Directorate Review of draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-metrics-08
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:03:55 -0000

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for
this draft (for background on appsdir, please see
 http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate).


Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.


Document: draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-metrics-08
Title: Reporting Metrics: Different Points of View
Reviewer: Eliot Lear
Review Date: 18 April 2012
IESG Telechat Date: 18 April 2012

Summary:

This document is almost ready for publication.  Perhaps also in an
academic journal ;-)

Minor comments:

I think the authors should seriously question the intended status of
this document.  Is this really a BCP?  The normative language, as
applied, suggests so.  See, for instance:
>    The minimal report on measurements MUST include both Loss and Delay
>    Metrics.

Alternatively, statements like this one should probably be stated in a
more matter-of-fact way, especially since it's rather obvious.

One additional comment: this work is EXTREMELY DENSE.  It is very well
referenced, but there a number of new concepts introduced, nearly
begging for separate works.  One example is introduction of Type-C,
where some additional expansion might be helpful to the reader (like me).

Nits:

Section 6.1: expand first use of acronyms OWAMP and TWAMP.

Eliot