Orie Steele has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile-26: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Orie Steele, ART AD, comments for draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile-26 CC @OR13 https://author-tools.ietf.org/api/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile-26.txt&submitcheck=True I agree with the comments from Deb Cooley regarding framing of normative language. ## Comments ### Grandmaster term ``` 157 * Best timeTransmitter: A clock with a PTP Port in the 158 timeTransmitter state, operating as the Grandmaster of a PTP 159 domain. ``` Does IEEE1588g define an alternative term for Grandmaster? Given the other terminology changes, perhaps `primaryTimeTransmitter`, is a better term to use. Later, the term `Preferred timeTransmitter` is used, is a "Preferred timeTransmitter" always a "primary timeTransmitter Clock within a domain of a PTP system". It seems odd to have the concept of a "preferred primary..." that is a backup... is the alternate timeTransmitter flag set when the "Preferred timeTransmitter" is a backup? Consider defining Grandmaster cluster as well, given the term appears later: ``` 479 timing for delay measurement. Grandmaster Clusters are NOT ALLOWED. ``` ### How to operate in the presence of a rogue timeTransmitter? ``` 429 timeTransmitters in their clock control subsystems. TimeReceiver 430 Clocks MUST be able to operate properly in the presence of a rogue 431 timeTransmitter. TimeReceivers SHOULD NOT Synchronize to a ``` Its not clear to me how to comply with this MUST, based on the surrounding context. Perhaps there is a citation that could be given for to answer the question of "how?". ## Nits ### aloted -> alloted ``` 357 Section D.3. These addresses are aloted by IANA, see the Ipv6 ``` ### ensembled -> assembled ``` 373 Domain. Redundant sources of timing can be ensembled, and/or ``` ensembled is ok, but a more common word might be easier to comprehend for most readers. ### syntonize -> synchronize ``` 456 Clocks which syntonize to the timeTransmitter Clock might need to ``` _______________________________________________ TICTOC mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
