Hi, I will address the points listed here below. Thanks for the review.
Concerning the following comment: > Sections 5.1.4, 5.2.1 and 8 have me confused about the > Attributes Flags TLV: > - Section 5.1.4 defines an Attributes Flags TLV here for Virtual TE links: the CALL ATTRIBUTE is defined in this document > - Section 5.2.1 points to RFC 5420 for what's apparently a different > Attributes Flags TLV and defines a Pre-Planned LSP flag in > that TLV. for Soft FA's: the LSP ATTRIBUTE defined in RFC 5420 is used to introduced a new flag > - Section 8 then apparently instructs IANA to put that bit into the > Attributes Flags TLV defined in Section 5.1.4 . > Something appears to be wrong with this combination - what was > the intent? If these two TLVs are the same, or share a common bit > assignment registry, that should be stated. I will clarify this because as they both refer to "attributes" precision of the terms used is indeed critical Thanks, -dimitri. > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 3:11 AM > To: PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri; VIGOUREUX MARTIN; > [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-11 > > 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-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-11 > Reviewer: David L. Black > Review Date: February 12, 2010 > IETF LC End Date: February 16, 2010 > > Summary: > This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits > that should be fixed before publication. > > Comments: > This draft extends GMPLS routing and signaling to support the > operation of GMPLS Multi-Layer/Multi-Region Networks. One needs to be > a GMPLS expert to fully understand this draft - although, I'm not a > GMPLS expert, the draft reads reasonably well. All of these comments > are minor. > > The IACD sub-TLV formats for OSPF and IS-IS appear to be > identical. If > they are in fact identical, a single ASCII text diagram should be used > for both. > > The description of the IACD sub-TLV format does not describe the > Max LSP Bandwidth fields. At a minimum the units and/or encoding of > these fields should be described here, even thought the full > specification may be elsewhere. > > Please add the values for Type and Length for the XRO SC subobject > into the ASCII figure in Section 4.1.1 . > > Section 4.1.2 defines a new subobject by making minor changes to an > existing one in another RFC; a complete ASCII diagram of the new > subobject would be helpful - please add one. > > Sections 5.1.4, 5.2.1 and 8 have me confused about the > Attributes Flags TLV: > - Section 5.1.4 defines an Attributes Flags TLV here > - Section 5.2.1 points to RFC 5420 for what's apparently a different > Attributes Flags TLV and defines a Pre-Planned LSP flag in > that TLV. > - Section 8 then apparently instructs IANA to put that bit into the > Attributes Flags TLV defined in Section 5.1.4 . > Something appears to be wrong with this combination - what was > the intent? If these two TLVs are the same, or share a common bit > assignment registry, that should be stated. > > idnits 2.12.00 found three nits: > > == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but > there was 1 > longer page, the longest (page 1) being 62 lines > > ** There are 144 instances of too long lines in the > document, the longest > one being 1 character in excess of 72. > > == Line 781 has weird spacing: '...ndwidth is st...' > > Thanks, > --David > ---------------------------------------------------- > David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer > EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 > +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 > [email protected] Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
