Subject: [Isis-wg] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-09: (with COMMENT)

From: "Barry Leiba" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 13:21:53 -0800

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-09: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I've only a couple of minor comments to add to what my colleagues have
already said:

-- Section 1 --

   For links, such as Forwarding Adjacencies, care must be taken

With the first comma, the qualifier "such as Forwarding Adjacencies" is
only parenthetical.  I think you're *specifically* talking about "links
such as Forwarding Adjacencies" here, so you need to remove that comma.

-- Section 5 --

   Min and max delay MAY be the lowest and/or highest measured value
   over a measurement interval or MAY make use of a filter, or other
   technique, to obtain a reasonable representation of a min and max
   value representative of the interval with compensation for outliers.

Making sure this normatively says what you want it to:
What this says is that min and max delay can be anything anyone wants it
to be, with no restrictions at all, because there are only 2119 "MAY" key
words here, and "MAY" means optional.  Specifically, it means that min
and max do NOT have to have any resemblance to any reasonable
representations.

What I think you *mean* to say is that they each MUST be one of two
things: either taken from measured values or be reasonable
representations.  You can freely choose between those, but they have to
be one or the other.  Is that correct?

If that's correct, then you need to say it in some manner such as this:

NEW
   Min and max delay MUST each be derived in one of the following ways:
   by taking the lowest and/or highest measured value over a measurement
   interval, or by makeins use of a filter or other technique to obtain
   a reasonable representation of a min and max value representative of
   the interval, with compensation for outliers.
END

---

From: "Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 17:52:05 +0000

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions/

yes. 

>   the interval, with compensation for outliers.

indeed, that’s what intended. 

Thanks for the suggestion, I’ll update the draft with your proposed text.

s.