Hi, Jon, Thank you very much for the shepherd review. Like to see this draft get moved forward. We have updated the draft including all the changes you suggested. BTW, I have done the usual idnits check and none found. (link: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-app-06). Please see my response inline: Regards, Xian [Pce] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-app-05
Jonathan Hardwick <[email protected]> Tue, 28 June 2016 11:54 UTCShow header<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=pce&q=stateful-pce-app> Return-Path: <[email protected]> X-Original-To: [email protected] Delivered-To: [email protected] Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6937812DE34; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 04:54:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.021 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.021 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=metaswitch.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RQFxJ4CksN24; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 04:54:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr690121.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.69.121]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF01112DE2F; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 04:54:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=metaswitch.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=3Q4SlBgVEWxkQJPu3RCEJvAOEVCy8pukTkptDMGaq2k=; b=miJ5PtwzGr1ts6xkkE0FR5u6vnx56jFiu6tPlw1gljBM7VjzxD6iP6CrwWQA6Bkoqt8MZ1b5cgkYjnizXaTJN+LfrEgICUrHENTCUEwfZiyNEGtpr0gCp4rSSBjTZvPQjVVphZO/cU+u6XzmiwW1g6+UBSIDlZLpNdbMpAU+9pY= Received: from BLUPR0201MB1908.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.162.239.154) by BLUPR0201MB1907.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.162.239.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.528.16; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:54:43 +0000 Received: from BLUPR0201MB1908.namprd02.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.239.154]) by BLUPR0201MB1908.namprd02.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.239.154]) with mapi id 15.01.0528.014; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:54:43 +0000 From: Jonathan Hardwick <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Thread-Topic: Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-app-05 Thread-Index: AdHOHuRE3ZUWjZCORDGhYo7AM/deNw== Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:54:42 +0000 Message-ID: <blupr0201mb1908d1ba387a88282d2633d784...@blupr0201mb1908.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) [email protected]; x-originating-ip: [81.132.84.33] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 3a50d51d-20c9-47c3-927b-08d39f4afe36 x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0201MB1907; 6:50dv9DVq6o1Ljn/+C8dHekd3GO2PejrxhgzNQb5HfLGT6EeyXfWBDSFPD0ZdoqYGdIfNLJJCciy0hVYauAXhZbHRxKdSxmDRiG1wQuuZg5ALIiZOl9NRUCBRFBbjajUUbLtuNRuffZy1TeG7Q/FOhuXepSdUHUXWZ6ylanpt26/cPOaSAFzmoEeQf/6tu/CFHntNIUdRK4kanwswaglFeilkLOi0KAOcGngIXztxM2cF3jjvybj0RckeKXw9OImUoZXne3A2bUwkve0O+r+Hw8I0zvfDNnB1qcIEuQGQoaM=; 5:OCc5OvQT/hhFpsLDOoce8nmZWXlflrx6St+BZiQuXDuPBGW4PO3I5RFqInj8hZ63KS6lxsG70M2tDwtOUH5nPXBPa0Mlik0PT7jVUrIK3wK3E+aqNPahFJDoPhuDjFF5GPEUacgJ3YqlMpD4un0mMw==; 24:SJjcubgZws2O+9nlQmGqSIB2OEDNmCk8t77L6PtAKIUEfy60YxOxLf+UsLSRGCzkdmP1DELBvyczgu+Vn6qjDiOUopPaa5hLhsj1yerh1qY=; 7:CiwUdJjb8CkMr9bLyTAHY4X8inuOHBQKJ16W9NpSL5nhWGbuK5d+CFF/YBfSivD4fYqSw6G3d0Bxae/SsL+G8UEyvRAN0V/7av4pFOtE+e5hSUJiGq2aTFjhEjL4PlbrF3mUyawHb3EajNl6/U7Liv7yCn17iNrJZlOzyup8Rx5WRdSj9ypqADNn8dpfTw02AonMi2wssRdqzzTBNCB3LgVLGSTG+k4nE1RtEBdGEXtmPKBogx+W8wSWPbF5r3HJ x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0201MB1907; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <blupr0201mb19070d2a383647b3249c55de84...@blupr0201mb1907.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(192374486261705)(788757137089)(21748063052155); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:BLUPR0201MB1907; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0201MB1907; x-forefront-prvs: 0987ACA2E2 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(7916002)(189002)(199003)(66654002)(81156014)(77096005)(97736004)(8676002)(81166006)(450100001)(122556002)(6116002)(230783001)(586003)(76576001)(8936002)(3846002)(2900100001)(11100500001)(105586002)(101416001)(15975445007)(74316001)(106356001)(790700001)(102836003)(99286002)(229853001)(19625215002)(2351001)(19300405004)(7736002)(2501003)(5003600100003)(7696003)(5630700001)(66066001)(2906002)(4326007)(10400500002)(9686002)(33656002)(87936001)(92566002)(3660700001)(3280700002)(19580395003)(5640700001)(110136002)(189998001)(54356999)(86362001)(50986999)(68736007)(5002640100001)(16236675004)(7846002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0201MB1907; H:BLUPR0201MB1908.namprd02.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: metaswitch.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BLUPR0201MB1908D1BA387A88282D2633D784220BLUPR0201MB1908_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: metaswitch.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Jun 2016 11:54:42.9346 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 9d9e56eb-f613-4ddb-b27b-bfcdf14b2cdb X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0201MB1907 Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/puBVxgtm-pIfwxjyfG2qMpuztqU> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: [Pce] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-app-05 X-BeenThere: [email protected] X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/> List-Post: <mailto:[email protected]> List-Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:54:50 -0000 Hi there I have reviewed this document as document shepherd. The document looks ready to be published to me, with a few minor fixes to nits in the text, as I have identified below. The document has expired. Please could you make the mark-ups below and refresh the document? Many thanks Jon Section 3 Discovery is now defined in the base stateful PCE draft. Replace reference to [I-D.sivabalan-pce-disco-stateful] with [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]. [Xian]: ok Section 4 4.2 "loading sharing" should be "load sharing". 4.3 "synchronizations procedures" should be "synchronization procedure" 4.3 "a network nodes" should be "a network node" [Xian]: all rectified. Section 5 5.3 says: If an active stateful PCE is available, the PCE can trigger the setup/deletion of scheduled requests in a centralized manner, without modification of existing head-end behaviors, by notifying the PCCs to set up or tear down the paths. This would imply the stateful PCE was doing LSP initiation. But LSP initiation does not seem to be covered by this document (not mentioned in section 3 or references) so this sentence seems misplaced. Should it be removed? [Xian]: As described in the initiation draft, it is still a kind of stateful PCE. So I would like to keep this sentence by introducing the PCE initiation draft in Section 3 plus adding a reference to this section. Does it work for you? 5.4.1 "is for a working or for protection" should be "is for a working path or for protection". "report the resource by a working or protection path" should be "report the resource as a working or protection path". "compute carry out" should be "compute" [Xian]: OK. 5.4.2 "exploited" sounds like a security breach. Instead, say "used". [Xian]: Sure. References [I-D.ietf-pce-questions] is now [RFC7399]. [I-D.ietf-ccamp-flexi-grid-fwk] is now [RFC7698]. [I-D.ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-compatibility-ospf] is now [RFC7688]. [I-D.ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te] is now [RFC7580]. Remove reference to [I-D.sivabalan-pce-disco-stateful]. [Xian]: all updated.
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
