Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info
Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Tue, 29 October 2013 18:26 UTC
Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B8511E8228 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:26:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.23
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.23 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.369, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 fMVcscSRWve9 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oproxy12-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (oproxy12-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [50.87.16.10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8353A11E822E for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:26:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 14145 invoked by uid 0); 29 Oct 2013 18:26:11 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by oproxy12.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 29 Oct 2013 18:26:11 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=e0JxwmAV2iKK7KY72C9Fzp1U5HMi/6J+4JqmrCMmqnQ=; b=wpexlzi/4SzoBcIuRIW94sKFy98dZWtFgpBTcuGu1tYnKkBidkn4/C+IyLoyPvv9eq75HZeE9CDudnUCQXKMBUeho+ZMdICdc/dB1kjqmH1S3g29N5hM6mqnTtq081m9;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:52645 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1VbDzX-00059f-HK; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 12:26:11 -0600
Message-ID: <526FFDBB.4020504@labn.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 14:26:03 -0400
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info@tools.ietf.org
References: <524AF9A9.3040006@labn.net> <5266E138.8080605@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <5266E138.8080605@labn.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 18:26:51 -0000
Authors, I have some comments on draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info. Most are strictly editorial. Note that I'm the document shepherd, see RFC 4858 for more information. - Please address my general comments on the WSON document set - You say: " relatively static on the time scales of connection establishment." I suspect you mean: " relatively static and independent of connection establishment." - Your references to [Switch] seem almost normative in nature. I suspect that this is not your intent as it is listed as an informative reference. Please revisit your references and ensure that the draft does not depend on any informative references. (Either change the text, or move the reference to normative.) - s/inputinput/input - s/outputoutput/output - Section 4.1: " ... and path computation [Encode]." While a normative reference to [Encode] is certainly just fine, I reference is unclear in this context. - Why say "potentially switched" vs just "switched"? if "potentially" doesn't add anything please drop it, otherwise please clarify. - Section 4.2: SRNG I don't see SRNG in any other documents. Am I missing it, is SRNG used anywhere? - Section 5: I found it hard to parse the following: As resources are the smallest identifiable unit of processing resource, one can group together resources into blocks if they have similar characteristics relevant to the optical system being modeled, e.g., processing properties, accessibility, etc. Do you perhaps mean? A resource is the smallest identifiable unit of allocation. One can group together resources into blocks if they have similar characteristics relevant to the optical system being modeled, e.g., processing properties, accessibility, etc. -Section 5.1: States: " Note that except for <ResourcePoolState> all the other components of <ResourcePool> are relatively static." But the related definitions are: <ResourcePool> ::= <ResourceBlockInfo>... [<ResourceAccessibility>...] [<ResourceWaveConstraints>...] [<RBPoolState>] (section 5) <DynamicNodeInfo> ::= <NodeID> [<ResourcePoolState>] (section 7.2) What's the intent here? - Section 5.2: What is the asterisk "*" all about. - Section 5.3.3 says <client-signal-list>::=[<GPID>]... should <client-signal-list> be <ClientSignalList> as defined in section 5.2? - Section 5.3.4 repeats section 5.2. replace: " as follows: <ProcessingCapabilities> ::= [<NumResources>] [<RegenerationCapabilities>] [<FaultPerfMon>] [<VendorSpecific>]" with "." - Section 6.5: I found the following language confused: This allows for the definition of one additional link metric value for traffic engineering separate from the IP link state routing protocols link metric. How about: This allows for the identification of a data channel link metric value for traffic engineering that is separate from the metric used for path cost computation of the control plane. - Section 6.6: Drop "(Wavelength)" from the title, this can be confused with the "WSON" indication in section headings - Section 6.6.: You just say (Wavelength) and leave it to the reader to infer the relationship between it and a label. I suggest you make the relationship explicit. - Section 6.6. I think you have a BNF problem here. The BNF says restriction parameters are always optional, but your text says that there are requirements based on <RestrictionTypes>. I think the BNF needs to be aligned with the text and reflect the requirements. - Section 7: You say " An example usage of this information in a WSON setting is given in [Shared]." References to URLs should be avoided (particularity when they aren't valid even at the time of publication, i.e., now). That's it on this one, Lou On 10/22/2013 4:34 PM, Lou Berger wrote: > > All, > Given the recent draft submission deadline and only one comment being > received to date, we'd like to extend the WG more time for review. > > These drafts represent significant work by the authors and WG, so please > review and let the WG know what you think (positive or negative)! > > Please have all comments in by October 29. > > Thank you, > Lou (and Deborah) > > On 10/1/2013 12:34 PM, Lou Berger wrote: >> All, >> >> This mail begins working group last call on the WSON documents. As >> there are 6 documents in this set, the last call will be three weeks. >> The documents included in the last call are: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-18 >> (Informational, IPR Disclosed) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-11 >> (Standards Track, IPR Disclosed) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode-21 >> (Standards Track) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-05 >> (Standards Track, IPR Disclosed) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-compatibility-ospf-12 >> (Standards Track, IPR Disclosed) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling-06 (Standards >> Track) Also has one open issue that will need to be resolved as part of >> LC, see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/trac/ticket/52. >> >> This working group last call ends on October 22. Comments should be >> sent to the CCAMP mailing list. Please remember to include the >> technical basis for any comments. >> >> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is >> ready for publication", are welcome! >> >> Please note that we're still missing some IPR statements. Any >> forthcoming publication request will be delayed by late IPR >> statements/disclosures. >> >> >> Thank you, >> Lou (and Deborah) >> _______________________________________________ >> CCAMP mailing list >> CCAMP@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > CCAMP mailing list > CCAMP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp > > > >
- [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-info, … Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Margaria, Cyril (Coriant - DE/Munich)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger