Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-10.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:50:42 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : A Thesaurus for the Terminology used in Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) drafts/RFCs and ITU-T's Transport Network Recommendations.
	Author(s)       : Huub van Helvoort
                          Loa Andersson
                          Nurit Sprecher
	Filename        : draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-10.txt
	Pages           : 20
	Date            : 2013-02-12

Abstract:
   MPLS-TP is based on a profile of the MPLS and PW procedures as
   specified in the MPLS-TE and (MS-)PW architectures developed by the
   IETF.  The ITU-T has specified a Transport Network architecture.

   This document provides a thesaurus for the interpretation of MPLS-TP
   terminology within the context of the ITU-T Transport Network
   recommendations.

   It is important to note that MPLS-TP is applicable in a wider set of
   contexts than just Transport Networks.  The definitions presented in
   this document do not provide exclusive nor complete interpretations
   of MPLS-TP concepts.  This document simply allows the MPLS-TP terms
   to be applied within the Transport Network context.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-10

A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-10

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Huub van Helvoort <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 22:20:04 +0100

Hello Tom,

I have uploaded draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-10 after addressing
your comments.

 > My big comment is that I would like all the entries in section 3
 > in alphabetic order.  Technically, it makes no difference but to
 > the user, I think it would be a big improvement.

Done.

 > At the moment, it is like turning to an English dictionary that is
 > divided into sections and needing to know whether a word derives
 > from Greek or Arabic, Sanskrit or Chinese, in order to know which
 > section it is in.  The fact that the first half is in alphabetic
 > order just makes it harder to use - if the ordering were seemingly
 > random, it would be less of a problem!

In a few places I made sub sections to group some of the definitions
of terms that have a relation.

 > Lesser comments.
 >
 > PST and SPME have made it into significant MPLS-TP RFC and will
 > be there for ever.  I would like (deprecated) entries for these
 > in this.

Done.

 > 3.12 CE is not expanded anywhere

Done.

 > 3.16 spurious period after the reference

Fixed.

 > 3.43 an MEG???

Depends on how you pronounce MEG...
- an emm eee gee
- a "meg"
I used the latter

 > 3.43 et seq.  The various ME entries lack any references; since
 > ME seems to me to have been the most troublesome aspect of MPLS-TP
 > and one that still leads to errors, such as the erroneous expansion
 > of MEP, I think that these entries above all need references.

References are added.

 > 3.45  This is a comprehensive entry and yet ...  TCM is not
 > expanded anywhere - I think it deserves an entry of its own.

Done.

 > Statements like
 > "A MEP terminates all the OAM packets that it receives"
 > makes me think 'from where?' do I really understand this?

Added "source" and "sink" to provide clarity.

 > while
 > "MPLS-TP MEP notifies a fault indication"
 > seems odd in highlighting just one aspect of a MEP's functionality;
 > again, why that?

Reworded.

 > 5 Operations and Management (OAM)
 > I love it - could we push for this usage to be adopted across the
 > IETF :-)

I am sorry to disappoint you, I followed RFC6291 (for obvious reasons).

 > I would like a reference for this section - there are a number of OAM
 > RFC to choose from, e.g. framework, analysis, requirements.

Done.

 > 6 I would like a reference for this section, perhaps the just-WGLC'd
 > draft-ietf-mpls-tp-security-framework

Done.

 > 9 I do like alphabetic order, for references as well (a comment I saw
 > recently from a GenArt reviewer).

Done.

 > Overall, it remains an impressive piece of work.

Thank you, much appreciated.

Cheers, Huub.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-10.txt
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:50:42 -0800
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
CC: [email-masked]

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
directories.
  This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working 
Group of the IETF.

	Title           : A Thesaurus for the Terminology used in Multiprotocol 
Label Switching Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) drafts/RFCs and ITU-T's 
Transport Network Recommendations.
	Author(s)       : Huub van Helvoort
                           Loa Andersson
                           Nurit Sprecher
	Filename        : draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-10.txt
	Pages           : 20
	Date            : 2013-02-12

Abstract:

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

---

From: t.petch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:43:39 +0000

Huub

Yes, I like it, especially the ordering:-)

Tom Petch