[trill] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-trill-over-ip-15

Reviewer: Matthew Miller Review result: Ready with Nits 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

Re: [trill] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-directory-assisted-encap-10: (with COMMENT)

Hi Eric, On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-trill-directory-assisted-encap-10: No Objection > > ... > > -- > COMMENT:

[trill] Benjamin Kaduk's practice ballot (No Objection) on draft-ietf-trill-smart-endnodes-10: (with COMMENT)

[incoming AD ramping up on document reviews; please treat as No Objection with COMMENT] I'm confused at what exactly constitutes a "Smart-Hello" -- Section 4.1 says that it "is a type of TRILL ES-IS PDU, which is specified in [RFC8171]". The reference does not use the term, so I assume that the

Re: [trill] [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls-07

Stewart, thanks for your review. I entered a No Objection ballot. Alissa > On Mar 2, 2018, at 3:25 PM, Stewart Bryant wrote: > > Reviewer: Stewart Bryant > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area >

Re: [trill] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls-07: (with DISCUSS)

Kathleen, I don’t want to speak for the authors. However, I did contribute to this draft (although not this specific section). So that said, here’s my two cents …. I agree that first sentence could have been worded better, but the bottom line is that depending on the model used, the security

[trill] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls-07: (with DISCUSS)

Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls-07: Discuss 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

Re: [trill] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-directory-assisted-encap-10: (with DISCUSS)

On March 7, 2018 at 4:48:35 PM, Donald Eastlake (d3e...@gmail.com) wrote: Are these changes satisfactory? Yes, these changes work for me. Thanks! Alvaro. ___ trill mailing list trill@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill

Re: [trill] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-smart-endnodes-10: (with DISCUSS)

Hi Alvaro, On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 4:34 PM, Alvaro Retana wrote: > Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-trill-smart-endnodes-10: Discuss > > ... > > -- > DISCUSS: >

Re: [trill] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-smart-endnodes-10: (withDISCUSS and COMMENT)

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote: > Hi Fangwei, > > As I noted in response to the Gen-ART reviewer, I managed to ballot before > reading the rest of this thread (sorry!), but I still think the diagram in > 4.3 is confusing and not consistent with the text.

Re: [trill] Alvaro Retana's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-directory-assisted-encap-10: (with DISCUSS)

Donald and Alvaro: Do we have an agreed upon text changes? If so, can we send a proposed change to Alvaro for review prior to Thursday's meeting? Sue Hares -Original Message- From: Donald Eastlake [mailto:d3e...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 3:27 PM To: Alvaro Retana Cc:

Re: [trill] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-vendor-channel-00: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Thanks, Donald === Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e...@gmail.com On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote: > > On Mar 6, 2018, at 11:11 PM, Donald Eastlake

Re: [trill] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-vendor-channel-00: (with COMMENT)

Hi Kathleen, On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-trill-vendor-channel-00: No Objection > > ... > >

[trill] Benjamin Kaduk's practice ballot (No Objection) on draft-ietf-trill-directory-assisted-encap-10 (with COMMENT)

[incoming AD ramping up on document review; please treat as No Objection with COMMENT] RBridge is not defined in the document and it looks like only "RBridge Channel" is marked as "well-known" in https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt (but not "RBridge" itself); perhaps I am

[trill] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-vendor-channel-00: (with COMMENT)

Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-trill-vendor-channel-00: 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

Re: [trill] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-vendor-channel-00: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> On Mar 6, 2018, at 11:11 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > > Hi Alissa, > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 3:28 PM, Alissa Cooper > wrote: >> Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for >>

Re: [trill] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-trill-smart-endnodes-10: (withDISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Fangwei, As I noted in response to the Gen-ART reviewer, I managed to ballot before reading the rest of this thread (sorry!), but I still think the diagram in 4.3 is confusing and not consistent with the text. To my eye row 3 shows two bytes’ worth of fields but the label says “4 bytes.”