Stephane,

Inline @ [RP]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:01 AM Stephane Litkowski (slitkows) <slitkows=
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi authors,
>
>
>
> Please find below my chair/shepherd’s review of
> draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-sr-p2mp.
>
>
>
>
>
> Introduction:
>
>
>
>    - “A SR P2MP tree is defined by a SR P2MP Policy and instantiated via
>    a PCE”
>       - I would use the name controller instead of PCE. PCE is really
>       tied to PCEP protocol IMO. If we agree, then you should change it across
>       the doc. I appears in other sections too.
>
>

[RP] This draft is based on the PIM WG SR P2MP policy draft
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-sr-p2mp-policy/ which
describes use of PCE to compute P2MP trees. Section 4.4 of that draft
clarifies that various protocols, such as PCEP, BGP etc. can be used
between PCE and PCC. IMO, it is appropriate to use PCE in this draft.


> Section 2:
>
>    - “A Replication segment of a SR P2MP tree can be instantiated…”
>       - Shoudln’t you provide informational refs here ?
>
>
>
[RP] The preceding text provides references for both Replication segments
(RFC 9524) SR P2MP tree (draft-ietf-pim-sr-p2mp-policy). Isn't that
sufficient.


> Section 3:
>
>    - I would enhance the tunnel-type description with a list, something
>    like
>
>
>
> “   *   Tunnel Type:
>
>    - 0x0c for SR-MPLS P2MP tree
>    - TBD for SRv6 P2MP Tree
>
> “
>
>
>
> Section 3.1.2
>
> s/”Domain- wide”/”Domain-wide” (remove space)
>
>
>
>
>
> Section 4.1.1
>
>
>
> Use an XML reference for RFC6514 Section 9.1.1 instead of hardcoding in
> text. (same in 4.1.2, 4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.3.2…).
>

[RP] These are "external" (eref as described in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7991#section-2.24)  references,
which are rendered appropriately as URI links in HTML format and with URI
text in TXT format.

>
>
> When you refer to “condition (c)”, it’s not clear, where it’s defined.
>

[RP] Added reference to Section 9.1.1 RFC 6514

>
>
>
>
>
>
> Section 10
>
>
>
> Please fix last name of Luc Andre (there are two “t” instead of t, it
> should be Burdet).
>

[RP] Fixed.

>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Stephane
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to