Re: [nvo3] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-07: (with COMMENT)
Hi, David, On Sep 19, 2016 18:55, "Black, David" wrote: > > Hi Spencer, > > Thanks for the careful read. > > > I couldn't parse > > > >L3 VN to Legacy L2: This type of gateway forwards packets on between > > L3 VNs and legacy L2 networks such as VLANs or L2 VPNs. The > > MAC address in any frames forwarded between the legacy L2 > > ^ > > network would be the MAC address of the gateway. > > ^^^ > > > > I could guess, but something is borked, and I'm not sure what is meant. > > Yes, it's definitely borked. Latter sentence rewritten to: > >The sender's destination MAC address in any frames that the gateway forwards from a legacy L2 network would be the MAC address of the gateway. > > The reverse direction case (gateway MAC is source MAC for frames forwarded to a legacy L2 network) can be inferred from that statement, so I haven't added text for that case. I did make corresponding wording changes to two other bullets - well, at least the borking was consistent ;-). > > > further down. > > > > I know what "hard" and "soft" errors are in my world, but I'm not sure > > what's meant here. > > That distinction is not important in this draft (e.g., it's not used elsewhere in the draft), so I removed it and combined the two bullets into: > > o Delivered to correct NVE, but could not deliver packet to TS-X. > > > Is > > > >o Allow different protocols and architectures to be used to for > > ^^ ^^^ > > intra- vs. inter-NVA communication. > > > > just a typo, or is there something missing between "to" and "for"? > > Yes, it's just a typo I changed: "used to for" -> "used for" > > Thanks, --David This all looks fine to me. Thanks for the quick response! Spencer > > -Original Message- > > From: Spencer Dawkins [mailto:spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:42 AM > > To: The IESG > > Cc: draft-ietf-nvo3-a...@ietf.org; Matthew Bocci; nvo3-cha...@ietf.org; > > matthew.bo...@alcatel-lucent.com; nvo3@ietf.org > > Subject: Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-07: (with > > COMMENT) > > > > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-07: No Objection > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nvo3-arch/ > > > > > > > > -- > > COMMENT: > > -- > > > > I found a small number of nits that I couldn't error-correct while > > reading, but I'm especially interested in Suresh's Discuss on TTL > > decrementing. > > > > I couldn't parse > > > >L3 VN to Legacy L2: This type of gateway forwards packets on between > > L3 VNs and legacy L2 networks such as VLANs or L2 VPNs. The > > MAC address in any frames forwarded between the legacy L2 > > ^ > > network would be the MAC address of the gateway. > > ^^^ > > > > I could guess, but something is borked, and I'm not sure what is meant. > > > > I'm having the same problem with > > > >L3 VN to L2 VN: This type of gateway forwards packets on between L3 > > VNs and L2 VNs. The MAC address in any frames forwarded > > between the L2 VN would be the MAC address of the gateway. > > ^ > > > > further down. > > > > I know what "hard" and "soft" errors are in my world, but I'm not sure > > what's meant here. > > > >o Delivered to correct NVE, but could not deliver packet to TS-X > > (soft error). > > > >o Delivered to correct NVE, but could not deliver packet to TS-X > > (hard error). > > > > Are these clearly understood terms of art in NV03? If not, could you > > provide some parenthetical "i.e.", as you do for other items in the same > > list, or some reference if an appropriate reference exists? > > > > Is > > > >o Allow different protocols and architectures to be used to for > > ^^ ^^^ > > intra- vs. inter-NVA communication. > > > > just a typo, or is there something missing between "to" and "for"? > > > ___ nvo3 mailing list nvo3@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
Re: [nvo3] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-07: (with COMMENT)
Hi Spencer, Thanks for the careful read. > I couldn't parse > >L3 VN to Legacy L2: This type of gateway forwards packets on between > L3 VNs and legacy L2 networks such as VLANs or L2 VPNs. The > MAC address in any frames forwarded between the legacy L2 > ^ > network would be the MAC address of the gateway. > ^^^ > > I could guess, but something is borked, and I'm not sure what is meant. Yes, it's definitely borked. Latter sentence rewritten to: The sender's destination MAC address in any frames that the gateway forwards from a legacy L2 network would be the MAC address of the gateway. The reverse direction case (gateway MAC is source MAC for frames forwarded to a legacy L2 network) can be inferred from that statement, so I haven't added text for that case. I did make corresponding wording changes to two other bullets - well, at least the borking was consistent ;-). > further down. > > I know what "hard" and "soft" errors are in my world, but I'm not sure > what's meant here. That distinction is not important in this draft (e.g., it's not used elsewhere in the draft), so I removed it and combined the two bullets into: o Delivered to correct NVE, but could not deliver packet to TS-X. > Is > >o Allow different protocols and architectures to be used to for > ^^ ^^^ > intra- vs. inter-NVA communication. > > just a typo, or is there something missing between "to" and "for"? Yes, it's just a typo I changed: "used to for" -> "used for" Thanks, --David > -Original Message- > From: Spencer Dawkins [mailto:spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:42 AM > To: The IESG > Cc: draft-ietf-nvo3-a...@ietf.org; Matthew Bocci; nvo3-cha...@ietf.org; > matthew.bo...@alcatel-lucent.com; nvo3@ietf.org > Subject: Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-07: (with > COMMENT) > > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-07: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nvo3-arch/ > > > > -- > COMMENT: > -- > > I found a small number of nits that I couldn't error-correct while > reading, but I'm especially interested in Suresh's Discuss on TTL > decrementing. > > I couldn't parse > >L3 VN to Legacy L2: This type of gateway forwards packets on between > L3 VNs and legacy L2 networks such as VLANs or L2 VPNs. The > MAC address in any frames forwarded between the legacy L2 > ^ > network would be the MAC address of the gateway. > ^^^ > > I could guess, but something is borked, and I'm not sure what is meant. > > I'm having the same problem with > >L3 VN to L2 VN: This type of gateway forwards packets on between L3 > VNs and L2 VNs. The MAC address in any frames forwarded > between the L2 VN would be the MAC address of the gateway. > ^ > > further down. > > I know what "hard" and "soft" errors are in my world, but I'm not sure > what's meant here. > >o Delivered to correct NVE, but could not deliver packet to TS-X > (soft error). > >o Delivered to correct NVE, but could not deliver packet to TS-X > (hard error). > > Are these clearly understood terms of art in NV03? If not, could you > provide some parenthetical "i.e.", as you do for other items in the same > list, or some reference if an appropriate reference exists? > > Is > >o Allow different protocols and architectures to be used to for > ^^ ^^^ > intra- vs. inter-NVA communication. > > just a typo, or is there something missing between "to" and "for"? > ___ nvo3 mailing list nvo3@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
[nvo3] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-07: (with COMMENT)
Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-nvo3-arch-07: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nvo3-arch/ -- COMMENT: -- I found a small number of nits that I couldn't error-correct while reading, but I'm especially interested in Suresh's Discuss on TTL decrementing. I couldn't parse L3 VN to Legacy L2: This type of gateway forwards packets on between L3 VNs and legacy L2 networks such as VLANs or L2 VPNs. The MAC address in any frames forwarded between the legacy L2 ^ network would be the MAC address of the gateway. ^^^ I could guess, but something is borked, and I'm not sure what is meant. I'm having the same problem with L3 VN to L2 VN: This type of gateway forwards packets on between L3 VNs and L2 VNs. The MAC address in any frames forwarded between the L2 VN would be the MAC address of the gateway. ^ further down. I know what "hard" and "soft" errors are in my world, but I'm not sure what's meant here. o Delivered to correct NVE, but could not deliver packet to TS-X (soft error). o Delivered to correct NVE, but could not deliver packet to TS-X (hard error). Are these clearly understood terms of art in NV03? If not, could you provide some parenthetical "i.e.", as you do for other items in the same list, or some reference if an appropriate reference exists? Is o Allow different protocols and architectures to be used to for ^^ ^^^ intra- vs. inter-NVA communication. just a typo, or is there something missing between "to" and "for"? ___ nvo3 mailing list nvo3@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
