All good, and thanks, Jorge, for taking the time to make the changes. Barry
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 8:30 PM Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Barry, > > Thank you very much for reviewing. > I addressed all your comments, see below. > Thanks a bunch! > Jorge > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Barry Leiba <[email protected]> > Date: Friday, May 4, 2018 at 3:51 PM > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" < > [email protected]>, "[email protected]" < > [email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Secdir last call review of > draft-ietf-bess-evpn-prefix-advertisement-10 > Resent-From: <[email protected]> > Resent-To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, < > [email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, < > [email protected]>, <[email protected]>, < > [email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, > Zhaohui Zhang <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> > Resent-Date: Friday, May 4, 2018 at 3:51 PM > > Reviewer: Barry Leiba > Review result: Has Issues > > The "issues" I call out below are minor, and if the working group > thinks they > aren't worth dealing with, I'll not be offended nor lose any sleep. > > — Section 1 — > I’m sure that all these terms are defined in the normative references, > and ’tis > a small thing, but it would sure help a non-expert reader if this list > of terms > included, for each term, a citation to the RFC that defines it. I > hope you’ll > consider adding that; thanks. > [JORGE] I added a few references. Hope it's better now. > > [Follow-up; I finally found “Tenant System” defined in RFC 7365, which > is not > in your references at all. Please don’t make your readers work that > hard, and > please consider beefing up the references and citations to > definitions.] > [JORGE] added now. > > — Section 2.1 — > > If the term Tenant System (TS) is used to designate a physical or > virtual system identified by MAC and maybe IP addresses, and > connected to a BD by an Attachment Circuit, the following > considerations apply: > > I find the wording “if the term Tenant System is used” to be odd. Are > you > really saying (maybe you are) that the application of the > considerations > depends on whether or not we *call* it a Tenant System? Or whether or > not it > *is* a Tenant System? From the definition I found for “Tenant System” > I can > see that maybe this can go either way. But if we’re talking about the > latter, > I’d use wording more like, “The following considerations apply to > Tenant > Systems (TS) that are physical or virtual systems identified by MAC > and maybe > IP addresses and connected to BDs by Attachment Circuits:” (cast as > plural, > because the considerations use plurals). > [JORGE] I took your suggestion, thx > > — Section 3.1 — > > I initially couldn’t figure out, as I was reading this, how you’d know > whether > you’re dealing with v4 or v6 addresses, and, therefore, how to > interpret the > lengths of the IP Prefix and GW IP Address fields. I finally got to > it seven > bullets down, where you say, “The total route length will indicate the > type of > prefix”. Maybe someone already expert in this would find this OK, > but to me > it was too much work to sort it out, when I think it could be made > clearer like > this: > > NEW > An IP Prefix Route Type for IPv4 has the Length field set to 34 > and consists of the following fields: > > +---------------------------------------+ > | RD (8 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > |Ethernet Segment Identifier (10 octets)| > +---------------------------------------+ > | Ethernet Tag ID (4 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > | IP Prefix Length (1 octet, 0 to 32) | > +---------------------------------------+ > | IP Prefix (4 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > | GW IP Address (4 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > | MPLS Label (3 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > > An IP Prefix Route Type for IPv6 has the Length field set to 58 > and consists of the following fields: > > +---------------------------------------+ > | RD (8 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > |Ethernet Segment Identifier (10 octets)| > +---------------------------------------+ > | Ethernet Tag ID (4 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > | IP Prefix Length (1 octet, 0 to 128) | > +---------------------------------------+ > | IP Prefix (16 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > | GW IP Address (16 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > | MPLS Label (3 octets) | > +---------------------------------------+ > > The total route length will indicate the type of IP Prefix (34 for > IPv4 or 58 for IPv6) and the type of GW IP Address. The IP Prefix > and GW IP Address are always both IPv4 or both IPv6; mixing the > two is not allowed. > > […and then follow with the explanations of the fields…] > END > > Do you agree that that makes things clearer? > > [JORGE] ok, done > > — Section 3.2 — > > o If either the ESI or GW IP are non-zero, then one of them is the > Overlay Index, regardless of whether the Router's MAC Extended > Community is present or the value of the Label. > > Should that say “then the non-zero one is the Overlay Index”? > [JORGE] ok, good point, done > > > > > -- Barry -- Barry Leiba ([email protected]) http://internetmessagingtechnology.org/
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
