I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-nsis-y1541-qosm-08.txt Reviewer: Brian Carpenter Review Date: 2010-01-20 IETF LC End Date: 2010-01-28 IESG Telechat date: Summary: Informational draft appears to contain normative material. -------- Major issues: ------------- > 3.1. Traffic Model (TMOD) Extension Parameter > > The traffic model (TMOD) extension parameter is represented by one > floating point number in single-precision IEEE floating point format > and one 32-bit reserved field. > > 0 1 2 3 > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > |M|E|N|r| 15 |r|r|r|r| 2 | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Peak Bucket Size [Bp] (32-bit IEEE floating point number) | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Reserved | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > > Figure 1: TMOD Extension Suddenly we have a protocol element defined in detail, but no explanation of what protcol it extends. Is this part of a QSPEC, or what? There should be some explanation and a reference. Also, this looks like normative material. What's it doing in an Informational draft? Same comment for 3.2. Restoration Priority Parameter. I suspect that a full analysis would find other hidden normative statements, such as > 4.6. Preemption Behaviour > > The default QNI behaviour of tearing down a preempted reservation is > followed in the Y.1541 QOSM. Not to mention the normative-style IANA Considerations. This should surely be Experimental or Standards Track, according to where it stands in the WG plan. Minor issues: ------------- In section 2.1: Classes 0 and 1 might be implemented using the DiffServ EF PHB, and support interactive real-time applications. Classes 2, 3, and 4 might be implemented using the DiffServ AFxy PHB Group, and support data transfer applications with various degrees of interactivity. Class 5 generally corresponds to the DiffServ Default PHB, I would expect references to RFC 3246, 2597 and 2474 in this text. Editorial: ------------- The formal title of this draft is ugly: Y.1541-QOSM -- Y.1541 QoS Model for Networks Using Y.1541 QoS Classes I suggest reducing it to Model for Networks Using Y.1541 QoS Classes
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
