Russ,
thank you for the review, comments, and suggestions. I've uploaded the updated version -08.
Regards,
Greg
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 11:44 AM Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thanks. Your proposed changes resolve all of my comments.RussOn Sep 21, 2021, at 7:20 PM, Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:<draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-08.txt><Diff_ draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-07.txt - draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-08.txt.html>--Hi Russ,thank you for your thorough review, thoughtful and helpful suggestions. Please find my notes in-lined below under the GIM>> tag. I've attached the new working version and the diff.Regards,GregOn Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:17 AM Russ Housley via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review result: Has Issues
I reviewed this document as part of the Security Directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These
comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Security Area
Directors. Document authors, document editors, and WG chairs should
treat these comments just like any other IETF Last Call comments.
Document: draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-07
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review Date: 2021-09-21
IETF LC End Date: 2021-09-28
IESG Telechat date: Unknown
Summary: Has Issues
Major Concerns: None
Minor Concerns:
General: All of the field names in this document use camel case, except
one. I think the document would be easier to read if My Discriminator
were to use the same convention. Also, HeadDiscriminator would be
more descriptive.GIM>> Thank you for pointing this out to me. I agree with the proposed update of the field name, The remaining in the text references to My Discriminator use the convention of RFC 5880. I hope that is acceptable.
Section 2.1 says:
The head MUST include the BFD Discriminator option in its Hello
messages.
This MUST statement cold me much more complete:
The head MUST include the BFD Discriminator option in its Hello
messages, and it MUST include a 4-byte My Discriminator with a
value other than zero.GIM>> Thank you, I agree with the proposed text with a minor modification based on re-naming of the field to HeadDiscriminator. Below is the update:OLD TEXT:The head MUST include the BFD Discriminator option in its Hellomessages.NEW TEXT:The head MUST include the BFD Discriminator option in its Hellomessages, and it MUST include a 4-byte HeadDiscriminator with a valueother than zero.
Section 2.3: s/must set/MUST set/GIM>> Thank you. Done.
Nits:
Section 1, para 1 could be more clear and more forceful. I suggest:
Faster convergence in the control plane minimizes the periods of
traffic blackholing, transient routing loops, and other situations
that may negatively affect service data flow. Faster convergence
in the control plane is beneficial to unicast and multicast routing
protocols.GIM>> Thank you for the suggested text. Accepted.
Section 1, para 2: s/DR is to act on behalf/DR acts on behalf/GIM>> Thank you. Done.
Section 1, para 3: The first sentence is very unclear. I cannot offer
an improvement because it is too hard to parse.GIM>> Would the following update make it clearer:OLD TEXT:Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) [RFC5880] had beenoriginally defined to detect a failure of point-to-point (p2p) paths- single-hop [RFC5881], multihop [RFC5883].NEW TEXT:Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) [RFC5880] had beenoriginally defined to detect a failure of a point-to-point (p2p)path, single-hop [RFC5881] or multihop [RFC5883].
Section 1, para 3: s/networks precisely/networks, and it precisely/GIM>> Thank you. Accepted.
Section 1.1.1: s/familiarity/Familiarity/GIM>> Done.
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
