On 04/08/2014 18:16, Donald Eastlake wrote:
Hi Alexey,
Hi Donald,
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Alexey Melnikov
<[email protected]> wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you
may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-trill-loss-delay-05
Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov
Review Date: 3 August 2014
IETF LC End Date: 21 July 2014
IESG Telechat date: 7 August 2014
Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.
[Ready with nits]
Major issues: None
Minor issues:
Section 6.4: who allocated opcodes? I.e. is there a registry?
These OAM OpCodes were created by and originally all under the control
of IEEE 802.1; however, 802.1 allocated the block of 32 OpCodes from
32 to 63 to ITU-T as documented in [802.1Q]. I don't think ITU-T
maintains an explicit registry other than the listing of assigned
OpCodes out of their range that appears in [Y.1731] but I could be
wrong.
Perhaps a sentence could be added to the end of Section 6.4 such as
"These OpCodes are from the range of values that has been allocated by
IEEE 802.1 [802.1Q] for control by ITU-T."
I think that would be very helpful. Otherwise there is a question why
there is no IANA registry for these and your extra sentence would
address that.
Nits:
I think it would be better to say that all "Reserved" fields are set to 0 by
the sender and ignored by the receiver.
I'll check with the other authors on that.
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
