Hi Linda,

We updated the draft, 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework/ .
The following text is added to address your first comments:

1.       Add "It's important to report the effective bandwidth of a radio link 
since it can be configured to dynamically adjust the modulation based on the 
current signal conditions." at the end of section 4.3.1. Actual status and 
performance of a radio link interface.

2.       Add "It's important to report signal degradation of the radio link." 
at the end of section 4.5.2 Alarm management.
Your rest comments are also addressed in the latest version.

From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yemin (Amy)
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 2:10 PM
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dun...@huawei.com>; gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework....@ietf.org; cc...@ietf.org; 
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Genart telechat review of 

Hi Linda,

Thanks for your review.

Please see my reply inline below.

We will soon update the draft to address the comments.



-----Original Message-----
From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Linda Dunbar
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 9:57 AM
To: gen-art@ietf.org<mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
 cc...@ietf.org<mailto:cc...@ietf.org>; i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>
Subject: [CCAMP] Genart telechat review of 

Reviewer: Linda Dunbar

Review result: Ready with Issues

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team 
(Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF 
Chair. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before 
posting a new version of the draft.

For more information, please see the FAQ at


Document: draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework-05

Reviewer: Linda Dunbar

Review Date: 2018-05-13

IETF LC End Date: 2018-04-20

IESG Telechat date: 2018-05-24


IETF LC End Date: N/A

IESG Telechat date: 2018-05-

Summary:  with a potential issue.

Page11, Section 4.5:

Missing signal degradation or partial fault management. Radio link is heavily 
impacted by weather. Rain/cloud can make a radio link lose up to 50% of its 
capacity. Therefore, it will be quite useful to report the effective bandwidth 
of the radio link.
[Amy] Yes, the bandwidth of the radio link is a very important characteristic. 
We put the bandwidth in the mw topology model, not in the interface model, just 
following the way in generic TE topology model.
Originally, this framework is for interface model only, therefore it doesn’t 
address the bandwidth. We could update the framework to address your comments.

Some questions:

Page 6: Can one Radio Link be shared by multiple Carrier Terminations?  If yes, 
are those multiple Carrier Terminations terminated at one physical device?
[Amy] Yes and yes.  The figure below (from draft-ietf-ccamp-mw-yang) is for 
your reference.


Page 7: do you mean “key goal or key purpose of this work” in the following 
sentence? “The adoption of an SDN framework for management and control the 
microwave interface is one of the key applications for this work.”

[Amy] Yes, your wording is much better, will use it.

Page 10, Section 4.1.2: What does “over the hop” mean in the first sentence?

Isn’t it same as “… establish L1 connectivity to an associated radio link…”?
[Amy] Please see the figure above, normally we call the near end node and far 
end node as a hop.  Here “over the hop” can be moved to the end of the 
sentences, or completely removed.

Major issues:  N/A

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

Best Regards, Linda Dunbar


CCAMP mailing list


Gen-art mailing list

Reply via email to