Hi,
I support the draft in this process, please see inline: This begins a 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-MPLS (11/11/2017 to 11/25/2017). Please consider if this draft is ready for publication. In this consideration please consider: 1) Does TRILL need to run over MPLS? Some data centers are interconnected over MPLS. Does this capability aid in deployment of TRILL? [RP]: Yes to both questions. 2) Is this specification ready for publication? [RP]: I have no objection to it being published, but have some review comments below. From an high-level/overview perspective, it seems reasonably clear/complete in terms of providing a problem statement and specifying the technologies needed to resolve the problem statement. 3) Do you know of any problems with this specification? [RP]: a . I think the draft may need to be more clear on how it maps an incoming (control and/or data-plane) packet to a specific tenant in either approach. Are pseudo-wires/MPLS circuits shared between tenants? Specifically if two or more tenants have the same switch-id on the Rbridge side, how does the solution differentiate between them based on the incoming packet? b. How does multi-topology Trill fit into this draft? c. Typos in figures 2, 4. Under "Rbat2" on the left-side of each figure, the label should probably be "Tenant 2 Site 1" (as opposed to "Tenant 2 Site 2")? thanks, Ramkumar Susan Hares (co-chair, document shepherd)
_______________________________________________ trill mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill
