Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

[Alissa Cooper]

Meral, thanks for your review. Pascal, thanks for the updates. I entered a No 
Objection ballot.

Alissa


> On Sep 2, 2020, at 4:46 PM, Meral Shirazipour 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
>   Thanks a lot. 
>  
> Best,
> Meral
>  
> From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" 
> Date: Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 5:13 AM
> To: Meral Shirazipour , "gen-art@ietf.org" 
> 
> Subject: RE: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09
>  
> Hello Meral
>  
> Just to let you know that I published -11 that addresses your comments. Since 
> -10 the  reference to MOP says “For a MOP value of 7, the compression MUST be 
> used by default …“ and the reference to values above is gone.
>  
> Please let me now if we are all set;
>  
> Take care;
>  
> Pascal
>  
> From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) 
> Sent: mercredi 19 août 2020 10:20
> To: Meral Shirazipour ; gen-art@ietf.org; 
> draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09
>  
> Hello Meral
>  
> Many thanks for your review!
>  
> For now there is the MoP value for 7 is not defined. When it is, it will 
> signal an extension. So it means future. This draft covers the transition 
> with legacy nodes. A MoP of 7 when defined will not be usable with legacy 
> nodes, there will be a flag day in between. 
>  
> We want that future to support RFC 8138 so there is no need for transition 
> flag. And we want it always on after that, leaving management control only if 
> that’s wanted.
>  
> Additional note: the current mind of the group is that RPLv2 will be 
> indicated by a MoP field set to 7 and the new mode of operation indicated in 
> a new option. If that happens as expected, a value of MoP<7 will mean RPLv1. 
> We could not really cast that in stone in this little draft, it may still 
> change, so we only specify the code behaviour without expanding on that 
> background.
>  
> Was that your questions?
>  
> Keep safe;
>  
> Pascal
>  
> From: Meral Shirazipour  <mailto:meral.shirazip...@ericsson.com>> 
> Sent: mercredi 19 août 2020 09:03
> To: gen-art@ietf.org <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>; 
> draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org 
> <mailto:draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09
>  
> 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 treat these comments just like any other last call 
> comments.
>  
> For more information, please see the FAQ at 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>>.
>  
> Document: draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09
>  
> Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
> Review Date: 2020-08-18
> IETF LC End Date: 2020-08-18
> IESG Telechat date: NA
>  
>  
> Summary: This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I 
> have some comments.
>  
> Major issues:
>  
> Minor issues:
>  
> Nits/editorial comments:
> -[Page 4] Section 3:
> "Section 6.3.1 of [RFC6550] defines a 3-bit Mode of Operation (MOP) in
>the DIO Base Object.  For MOP values 0 to 6, the use of compression
>depends on the "T" flag as specified in this document. A MOP value
>of 7 and above MUST use compression by default and ignore the setting
>of the "T" flag.
> "
>  
> It was not clear to me at first read why "A MOP value of 7 and above MUST use 
> compression by default and ignore the setting of the "T" flag" ?
>  
>  
> Best Regards,
> Meral
> ---
> Meral Shirazipour
> Ericsson
> Research
> www.ericsson.com 
> <http://www.ericsson.com/>___
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

[Meral Shirazipour]

Hi,
  Thanks a lot.

Best,
Meral

From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" 
Date: Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 5:13 AM
To: Meral Shirazipour , "gen-art@ietf.org" 

Subject: RE: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

Hello Meral

Just to let you know that I published -11 that addresses your comments. Since 
-10 the  reference to MOP says “For a MOP value of 7, the compression MUST be 
used by default …“ and the reference to values above is gone.

Please let me now if we are all set;

Take care;

Pascal

From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
Sent: mercredi 19 août 2020 10:20
To: Meral Shirazipour ; gen-art@ietf.org; 
draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138....@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

Hello Meral

Many thanks for your review!

For now there is the MoP value for 7 is not defined. When it is, it will signal 
an extension. So it means future. This draft covers the transition with legacy 
nodes. A MoP of 7 when defined will not be usable with legacy nodes, there will 
be a flag day in between.

We want that future to support RFC 8138 so there is no need for transition 
flag. And we want it always on after that, leaving management control only if 
that’s wanted.

Additional note: the current mind of the group is that RPLv2 will be indicated 
by a MoP field set to 7 and the new mode of operation indicated in a new 
option. If that happens as expected, a value of MoP<7 will mean RPLv1. We could 
not really cast that in stone in this little draft, it may still change, so we 
only specify the code behaviour without expanding on that background.

Was that your questions?

Keep safe;

Pascal

From: Meral Shirazipour 
mailto:meral.shirazip...@ericsson.com>>
Sent: mercredi 19 août 2020 09:03
To: gen-art@ietf.org<mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>; 
draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138....@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

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 treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at 
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review Date: 2020-08-18
IETF LC End Date: 2020-08-18
IESG Telechat date: NA


Summary: This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have 
some comments.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
-[Page 4] Section 3:
"Section 6.3.1 of [RFC6550] defines a 3-bit Mode of Operation (MOP) in
   the DIO Base Object.  For MOP values 0 to 6, the use of compression
   depends on the "T" flag as specified in this document. A MOP value
   of 7 and above MUST use compression by default and ignore the setting
   of the "T" flag.
"

It was not clear to me at first read why "A MOP value of 7 and above MUST use 
compression by default and ignore the setting of the "T" flag" ?


Best Regards,
Meral
---
Meral Shirazipour
Ericsson
Research
www.ericsson.com<http://www.ericsson.com>
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

[Pascal Thubert (pthubert)]

Hello Meral

Just to let you know that I published -11 that addresses your comments. Since 
-10 the  reference to MOP says “For a MOP value of 7, the compression MUST be 
used by default …“ and the reference to values above is gone.

Please let me now if we are all set;

Take care;

Pascal

From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
Sent: mercredi 19 août 2020 10:20
To: Meral Shirazipour ; gen-art@ietf.org; 
draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

Hello Meral

Many thanks for your review!

For now there is the MoP value for 7 is not defined. When it is, it will signal 
an extension. So it means future. This draft covers the transition with legacy 
nodes. A MoP of 7 when defined will not be usable with legacy nodes, there will 
be a flag day in between.

We want that future to support RFC 8138 so there is no need for transition 
flag. And we want it always on after that, leaving management control only if 
that’s wanted.

Additional note: the current mind of the group is that RPLv2 will be indicated 
by a MoP field set to 7 and the new mode of operation indicated in a new 
option. If that happens as expected, a value of MoP<7 will mean RPLv1. We could 
not really cast that in stone in this little draft, it may still change, so we 
only specify the code behaviour without expanding on that background.

Was that your questions?

Keep safe;

Pascal

From: Meral Shirazipour 
mailto:meral.shirazip...@ericsson.com>>
Sent: mercredi 19 août 2020 09:03
To: gen-art@ietf.org<mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>; 
draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

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 treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at 
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review Date: 2020-08-18
IETF LC End Date: 2020-08-18
IESG Telechat date: NA


Summary: This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have 
some comments.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
-[Page 4] Section 3:
"Section 6.3.1 of [RFC6550] defines a 3-bit Mode of Operation (MOP) in
   the DIO Base Object.  For MOP values 0 to 6, the use of compression
   depends on the "T" flag as specified in this document. A MOP value
   of 7 and above MUST use compression by default and ignore the setting
   of the "T" flag.
"

It was not clear to me at first read why "A MOP value of 7 and above MUST use 
compression by default and ignore the setting of the "T" flag" ?


Best Regards,
Meral
---
Meral Shirazipour
Ericsson
Research
www.ericsson.com<http://www.ericsson.com>
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

[Pascal Thubert (pthubert)]

Hello Meral

Many thanks for your review!

For now there is the MoP value for 7 is not defined. When it is, it will signal 
an extension. So it means future. This draft covers the transition with legacy 
nodes. A MoP of 7 when defined will not be usable with legacy nodes, there will 
be a flag day in between.

We want that future to support RFC 8138 so there is no need for transition 
flag. And we want it always on after that, leaving management control only if 
that’s wanted.

Additional note: the current mind of the group is that RPLv2 will be indicated 
by a MoP field set to 7 and the new mode of operation indicated in a new 
option. If that happens as expected, a value of MoP<7 will mean RPLv1. We could 
not really cast that in stone in this little draft, it may still change, so we 
only specify the code behaviour without expanding on that background.

Was that your questions?

Keep safe;

Pascal

From: Meral Shirazipour 
Sent: mercredi 19 août 2020 09:03
To: gen-art@ietf.org; draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

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 treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at 
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review Date: 2020-08-18
IETF LC End Date: 2020-08-18
IESG Telechat date: NA


Summary: This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have 
some comments.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
-[Page 4] Section 3:
"Section 6.3.1 of [RFC6550] defines a 3-bit Mode of Operation (MOP) in
   the DIO Base Object.  For MOP values 0 to 6, the use of compression
   depends on the "T" flag as specified in this document. A MOP value
   of 7 and above MUST use compression by default and ignore the setting
   of the "T" flag.
"

It was not clear to me at first read why "A MOP value of 7 and above MUST use 
compression by default and ignore the setting of the "T" flag" ?


Best Regards,
Meral
---
Meral Shirazipour
Ericsson
Research
www.ericsson.com<http://www.ericsson.com>
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

[Meral Shirazipour]

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 treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at 
.

Document: draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-09

Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review Date: 2020-08-18
IETF LC End Date: 2020-08-18
IESG Telechat date: NA


Summary: This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have 
some comments.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
-[Page 4] Section 3:
"Section 6.3.1 of [RFC6550] defines a 3-bit Mode of Operation (MOP) in
   the DIO Base Object.  For MOP values 0 to 6, the use of compression
   depends on the "T" flag as specified in this document. A MOP value
   of 7 and above MUST use compression by default and ignore the setting
   of the "T" flag.
"

It was not clear to me at first read why "A MOP value of 7 and above MUST use 
compression by default and ignore the setting of the "T" flag" ?


Best Regards,
Meral
---
Meral Shirazipour
Ericsson
Research
www.ericsson.com
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art