Hi Dan,
Thanks for your review and please check inline below for responses.
On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 1:25 PM Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
Review result: Has Issues
Ready with Issues.
This document defines the protocol extensions for OSPF to advertise the link
attributes of L2 interface bundle members such as instances of a IEEE 802.1AX
Link Aggregation Group (LAG).
This is a very useful document. It's clear and well-written. Operators that
deploy OSPF in environments where IEEE 802.1AX or other L2 bundle interfaces
may be present in routers will find this document very relevant.
My main issue is related to the lack of any operational or management
considerations. I believe that the following should be mentioned explicitly or
by reference in a short Operational and Manageability Issues section:
- any backwards compatibility or transition issues at deployment
- any impact on traffic
- any configuration parameters and default values
- management including possible extensions of YANG or MIB modules
KT> These aspects are covered in the introduction section - the last paragraph and bullet list thereafter. They are not a section in this document since these aspects are outside the scope of this document. There are no backward compatibility considerations since this information is not used for OSPF protocol operations. The configuration of the per member link attributes may not be even under an OSPF model. Some of them like link bandwidth may be obtained from the interface model. AFAIR there has been no requirement or discussion for their inclusion in the IGP models in the WG even during similar work in ISIS.
I agree with the issues raised by the Gen-ART reviewer concerning the
references, with the difference that I believe that [IEEE 802.1AX] should
remain a Normative Reference. It's a full IEEE 802.1 standard, so referencing
as Normative is fine.
KT> Thanks for the confirmation.
I would also suggest sending the document for review to the IEEE 802.1 WG via
the IETF-IEEE coordination team.
KT> I am not sure if this is necessary, but I see that John has already reached out and so we'll wait for feedback on this one.
Thanks,
Ketan
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
