Hi Bruno, thanks for your new review. I've tried to adapt text and deleted the related sections below. In some cases, I didn't change text, that's discussed below (marked [RG]).
Regards, Ruediger Name: draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase Revision: 06 Title: A Scalable and Topology-Aware MPLS Dataplane Monitoring System Document date: 2017-02-21 Group: spring Pages: 16 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-06.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-06 Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-06 Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Gesendet: Freitag, 10. Februar 2017 18:45 An: Geib, Rüdiger Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Betreff: RE: draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase - shepherd review Hi Ruediger, Thanks for the answer and the updated draft which is indeed improved. Reading the new version, I have additional comments below: --- Idnits report 1 issue: "== It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 16 pages" https://tools.ietf.org/idnits?url=https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-05.txt [RG] The document is edited in xml using an IETF template and uses the xml to txt conversion of IETF. I can contact the rfc editor and/or tool author. I'd prefer the RFC editor to solve the issue or give me guidance. [snip] --- §5.1 " Finally, the PMS sets up and sends packets to monitor connectivity of the ECMP routed paths. The PMS does this by creating a measurement packet with the following label stack (top to bottom): 20 - 30 - 10. The ping packets reliably use the monitored path, if the IP-address information which has been detected by the MPLS trace route is used as the IP destination address (note that this IP address isn't used or required for any IP routing)." >From the first sentence, I'm understanding that the traceroute part is >finished and now, end to end monitoring packets are sent using the regualr >MPLS dataplane. In such context, I'm not following the latest sentence. You are saying that the PMS sends a measurement packet with label stack 20 - 30 - 10 and IP destination address previously detected. For me, such measurement packet will follow the path LERi (20), LERj (30), PMS (10). A priori the PSM will send capture back the packet, hence this packet will not be forwarded using the IP destination address. So why is this IP destination address important? [RG] I added a reference to Downstream Mapping information / RFC4379 in the section, as your question is answered there. I think, a detailed explanation of how to apply the RFC4379 tool set to monitor an MPLS network should be part of a separate document, if there's community interest. Thanks, Regards, Bruno
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
