Thanks again, Faisal, for taking time to review and comment! All very useful.

We will spin a new rev addressing them. 

Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro.
Excuze typofraphicak errows

> On Oct 1, 2016, at 11:02, Faisal Iqbal (faiqbal) <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Thank you Ruediger for your quick response. I agree with your suggestions and 
> don't have any further comments.
> 
> Regards,
> Faisal Iqbal
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 6:40 AM
> To: Faisal Iqbal (faiqbal) <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: AW: WGLC for draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase
> 
> Hi Faisal,
> 
> thanks for your review and comments. My remarks in line below, marked [RG].
> 
> Regards, Ruediger
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: spring [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Faisal Iqbal 
> (faiqbal)
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. September 2016 06:13
> An: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: [spring] WGLC for draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase
> 
> Hi,
> This is a useful and very well-written document. I have some minor comments 
> and possible syntax corrections for the authors.
> 
> Minor:
> ------
> In my opinion, the document should further explain if it's proposing a new 
> system or outlining what must be there in existing systems. Do we want to 
> implement such a data plane validation or enhance/reuse BFD for that purpose?
> 
> [RG] The outlined system works with MPLS as is today. BFD could be 
> implemented as part of a PMS to monitor a path. I'll add text to state that 
> (in that case, scalability has to be regarded and determination of the 
> failing path). 
> 
> Note in Page 5: Why will the PMS host not be part of MPLS domain? Isn't it 
> given because a) solution applies to IGP and host will be part of IGP, and b) 
> The top label is for path from PMS to LER I so there is an MPLS path there.
> 
> [RG] It is just one option that the PMS is not part of the MPLS domain (the 
> latter is the best option for a realization). It should be part of the IGP 
> domain. But a design with a PMS neither being part of the MPLS domain, nor 
> being part of the IGP domain is possible. I'll clarify that.
> 
> Paragraph 1, Page 8: "The PMS further could be enabled to send MPLS OAM 
> packets with the label stack and address information identical to those of 
> the monitoring packets to any node of the MPLS domain". Can you please 
> clarify this? I don't understand the use case.
> 
> [RG] I'll add some text. MPLS OAM allows to detect routing of packets along 
> ECMP paths. So there are choices, if a path between LERi - LSRx/LSRy - LER j 
> is to be monitored: either detect a desired path crossing, say, LSRx to be 
> used
> - by MPLS OAM and only send the monitoring packet with Label LERy and a 
> suitable IP dest address from LERj or
> - use a Label stack (LSRx) and LSRj (PHP will have removed the former).
> 
> Section 6 mentions the applicability of this solution for LDP but leaves out 
> RSVP-TE tunnels. Won't it also be beneficial in monitoring active RSVP-TE 
> tunnels as well?
> 
> [RG] Let's add a "possibly also RSVP-TE" here, I don't know for sure. 
> Deutsche Telekom developed such a system for an LDP signaled MPLS domain. I 
> can't discuss how to build it for RSVP-TE signaled tunnels (and don't want to 
> be obliged to do that).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syntax: [RG] will be picked up for the next version....
> -------
> Paragraph 2 on Page 3 should read "This document describes a system of using 
> MPLS data plane pat monitoring capabilities" instead of "This document 
> describes illustrates a system of using MPLS data plane pat monitoring 
> capabilities"
> 
> Paragraph 2, Page 3: Change "The use case introduced here" to "The use cases 
> introduced here"
> 
> Paragraph 5, Page 3: Shouldn't it read "pre-Segment Routing (SR) based 
> technology" instead of "pre-Segment based Routing (SR) technology"?
> 
> Paragraph 5, Page 3: Change "domains complete MPLS topology" to "domain's 
> complete MPLS topology"
> 
> Paragraph 5, Page 3: Change "domains forwarding plane" to "domain's 
> forwarding plane"
> 
> Paragraph 2, Page 4: Change "recongise an execute" to "recognise and execute"
> 
> Paragraph 4, Page 4: Change "The MPLS path monitoring system may be a any 
> server" to "The MPLS path monitoring system may be at any server"
> 
> Paragraph 2, Page 5: Change "monitor the path of it to LER j and then receive 
> the packet back" to "monitors its path to LER j and then receives the packet 
> back"
> 
> Bullet 3, Page 7": Remove "to" from "The path LER j to PMS to must be 
> available"
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Faisal Iqbal
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: spring [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Martin Horneffer
> Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 8:02 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [spring] WGLC for draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase
> 
> Hello everyone,
> 
> speaking as co-worker of one of the editors: From my own viewpoint I think 
> this document makes a lot of sense and is in a good state. I'm not aware of 
> any problemwith the current state of the document. And there already is an 
> implementation report. The document should be sent to the IESG.
> 
> The only reason not to do so might be to abandon SPRING usecase documents at 
> all. But since we have bee asked to produce usecase documents and went along 
> that track so far, we should IMHO proceed by promoting this document as well.
> 
> Best regards, Martin
> 
> 
>> Am 12.09.16 um 18:30 schrieb [email protected]:
>> Dear SPRING WG,
>> 
>> The authors have indicated that draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase is ready for 
>> WGLC.
>> 
>> Please send your comments to [email protected] on whether this use case is 
>> ready to be sent to the IESG as an informational draft. We will plan to end 
>> the WGLC on September 26.
>> 
>> * Please comment as silence counts as a lack of interest. In the 
>> absence of WG support and review, this document will not be sent to 
>> the IESG. *
>> 
>> You may also be interested in an implementation report: 
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-r
>> eport-00
>> 
>> This document has 2 disclosed IPR: 
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-ietf-sp
>> ring-oam-usecase
>> 
>> We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of what 
>> this document describe. Please inform the mailing list, the chairs, or only 
>> one of the chairs.
>> 
>> Finally, if you want to volunteer to be Document Shepherd for this document, 
>> please let us know.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> --Bruno
>> 
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> ___________________________________________________
>> 
>> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
>> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, 
>> exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message 
>> par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les 
>> pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, 
>> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
>> falsifie. Merci.
>> 
>> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or 
>> privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be 
>> distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and 
>> delete this message and its attachments.
>> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
>> modified, changed or falsified.
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> spring mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Faisal Iqbal
> ENGINEER.SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
> [email protected]
> Tel: +1 613 254 3853
> Cisco Systems, Inc.
> 2000 Innovation Drive
> KANATA
> K2K 3E8
> Canada
> cisco.com
> 
> 
> Think before you print.
> This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use 
> of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by 
> others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or 
> authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply 
> email and delete all copies of this message.
> Please click here for Company Registration Information.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: spring [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
> [email protected]
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 12:30 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: [spring] WGLC for draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase
> 
> Dear SPRING WG,
> 
> The authors have indicated that draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase is ready for 
> WGLC.
> 
> Please send your comments to [email protected] on whether this use case is 
> ready to be sent to the IESG as an informational draft. We will plan to end 
> the WGLC on September 26.
> 
> * Please comment as silence counts as a lack of interest. In the absence of 
> WG support and review, this document will not be sent to the IESG. *
> 
> You may also be interested in an implementation report: 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-leipnitz-spring-pms-implementation-report-00
> 
> This document has 2 disclosed IPR: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase
> 
> We are also polling for knowledge of implementations of part or all of what 
> this document describe. Please inform the mailing list, the chairs, or only 
> one of the chairs.
> 
> Finally, if you want to volunteer to be Document Shepherd for this document, 
> please let us know.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --Bruno
> 
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, 
> exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par 
> erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les 
> pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, 
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
> falsifie. Merci.
> 
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
> information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, 
> used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
> this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
> modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
> 
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
> 
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

Reply via email to