Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat Call review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-mldp-nlri-07

From: Meral Shirazipour <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 08:21:45 +0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at < http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-mldp-nlri-07

Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour

Review Date: 2014-11-24

IETF LC End Date: 2014-10-27

IESG Telechat date: 2014-11-25

Summary: This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have some  comments .

Minor issue:

->

page [Page 8]:

"

- Range 0x41-0x7f: mLDP Range.  Values are assigned from this range

       when the NLRI format associated with the route type presupposes

       that mLDP is the C-multicast control protocol.

"

Should it be should it be Range 0x43-0x7f ? since 0x40-0x42  is  Reserved.

Nits:

->

Please see LC message as well: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/msg10805.html

Best Regards,

Meral

---

Meral Shirazipour

Ericsson

Research

www.ericsson.com

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:29:25 +0100

Is there a response to this? It seems important that the ranges are correct.

Jari

On 24 Nov 2014, at 09:21, Meral Shirazipour <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: Martin Vigoureux <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:37:50 +0100

Jari, Meral,

Eric had changed of email address.
I have forwarded him the review when it came out.
He took note but said he would submit the updated draft few weeks after 
due to the pre-IETF submission cut-off.
I guess it should come out soon.

However, I am not sure about the change, but I'll let Eric comment on 
this also.

The draft defines ranges:
0x01-0x3f: Generic/PIM Range
0x41-0x7f: mLDP Range
0x80-0xff: reserved

The fact that 0x41 and 0x42 are reserved is not a reason to shrink the 
range. The assigned code points are such that the low order six bits are 
the same in the two ranges so for consistency reason it make sense to 
have ranges of equal length. In fact the draft says:
    In general, whenever an assignment is requested from this registry,
    two codepoints should be requested at the same time: one from the
    Generic/PIM range and one from the mLDP range.  The two codepoints
    should have the same low-order 5 bits.  If one of the two codepoints
    is not actually needed, it should be registered anyway, and marked as
    "reserved".
And the draft for example assigns 0x01 to Intra-AS I-PMSI A-D route. So, 
0x41 is also assigned to "Reserved" and so should be part of the mLDP Range.

By the way, Eric, I have spotted two typos.
You say
    In general, whenever an assignment is requested from this registry,
    two codepoints should be requested at the same time: one from the
    Generic/PIM range and one from the mLDP range.  The two codepoints
    should have the same low-order 5 bits.  If one of the two codepoints
    is not actually needed, it should be registered anyway, and marked as
    "reserved".
And
    IANA has been requested to allocate codepoints for these
    three route types such that (a) the high order two bits have the
    value 0x01, and (b) the low order bit six bits have the same value as
    the codepoints for the corresponding route types from [MVPN-BGP].

First paragraph talks about same low-order 5 bits while the latter one 
about 6 bits, and on top of that there is and extra "bit" in the sentence.

-m

---

From: Eric C Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:40:39 -0500

I just posted the -09 version of the draft, which has the requested 
changes (including most of Meral's suggestions and also including the 
typos pointed out today by Martin).

I changed the start of the mLDP range to 0x43; the choice of 0x41 is 
also defensible (as Martin has argued), but it is probably less 
confusing to make it 0x43.

---

From: Meral Shirazipour <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 21:25:32 +0000

Hi,
  Thank you for the changes, latest version http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-mldp-nlri-08 looks good.

Best regards,
Meral

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric C Rosen [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 11:41 AM
To: Martin Vigoureux; Jari Arkko; Meral Shirazipour
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat Call review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-mldp-nlri-07

I just posted the -09 version of the draft, which has the requested changes (including most of Meral's suggestions and also including the typos pointed out today by Martin).

I changed the start of the mLDP range to 0x43; the choice of 0x41 is also defensible (as Martin has argued), but it is probably less confusing to make it 0x43.

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 23:20:39 +0100

Eric, Meral - thanks.

jari