Hi Giuseppe,
I have uploaded a new version that addressed your comments.
thanks,
Peter
On 30/05/2025 10:35, Giuseppe Fioccola wrote:
Hi Peter,
Thank you for considering my comments.
Please see inline [GF].
Regards,
Giuseppe
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak<[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2025 5:29 PM
To: Giuseppe Fioccola<[email protected]>;[email protected]
Cc:[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-06 ietf last call Opsdir
review
Hi Giuseppe,
thanks for your comments, please see inline:
On 29/05/2025 12:14, Giuseppe Fioccola via Datatracker wrote:
Document: draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce
Title: IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement
Reviewer: Giuseppe Fioccola
Review result: Has Nits
This document defines two new flags in IS-IS and OSPF to signal loss
of reachability to an individual prefix in case of summarization. I
think that it has a well defined scope and is almost ready for
publication. In this regard, I noticed the normative reference to
draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags,
which, I guess, will be published before this document.
yes, I will update the reference when that draft changes to RFC.
[GF]: Yes
I have only few minor comments for your consideration:
- In the Abstract, I suggest to replace 'In the presence of summarization,'
with 'Summarization is often used in IGP to improve network efficiency, but'.
will do.
[GF]: Ok
- In the Introduction, I suggest to swap the last two paragraphs,
otherwise it is not clear how they are sequential.
will do
[GF]: Ok
- Section 4 on "Generation of the UPA" could be moved before section 2
on "Supporting UPA in IS-IS" and section 3 on "Supporting UPA in
OSPF". I think it would be more logical.
will do
[GF]: Ok
- Section 6 on "Deployment Considerations for UPA" seems to discuss
only the case of area/domain partition. I would also highlight what
are the operational benefits of UPA, as briefly mentioned in the Introduction.
Maybe we can rename the section 6 to "Area Partition".
[GF]: If the goal is to discuss only Area Partition, I agree to rename the
title of the section.
- In section 9 on "Security Considerations", you can also add the
reference to
RFC7794 and draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags.
will do.
[GF]: Ok
thanks,
Peter
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
