Hi Michael, Adrian, Thanks for the comments. I will update the document at the earliest and send it out to all the authors before uploading the new version. Regards, Shaleen -----Original Message----- From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2011 1:03 PM To: 'SCHARF, Michael'; draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-lsp-ping@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: tsv-area@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; tsv-dir@xxxxxxxx Subject: RE: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-lsp-ping Excellent catch Michael! Looks like that has been in place since the earliest text on jitter. I'm going to suggest that it exists because 3.3 tries to cover all cases, where 4.1.2 separates P2MP and P2P cases. But it isn't a very convincing argument, and the text needs to be fixed. Cheers, Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: SCHARF, Michael [mailto:Michael.Scharf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: 29 May 2011 09:47 > To: draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-lsp-ping@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: tsv-area@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; tsv-dir@xxxxxxxx > Subject: tsv-dir review of draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-lsp-ping > > Hello, > > I've reviewed this document as part of the transport area directorate's > ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written > primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the > document's authors for their information and to allow them to address > any issues raised. The authors should consider this review together with > any other last-call comments they receive. Please always CC > tsv-dir@xxxxxxxx if you reply to or forward this review. > > Disclaimer: Please note that I am a transport protocol researcher and > thus not familiar with details of the MPLS OAM mechanisms. > > This draft is basically ready for publication, but there is an issue > that should be fixed before publication. > > > Content: > -------- > > The LSP ping relies on the "Echo Jitter TLV" to deal with the implosion > of feedback messages, which is important in order to avoid congestion. > However, there seems to be a SHOULD/MUST mismatch concerning the > required reaction: > > - Section 3.3: "A responding node SHOULD wait a random amount of time > between zero milliseconds and the value specified in this field." > > - Section 4.1.2: "If this TLV is present, the responding LSR MUST delay > sending a response for a random amount of time between zero milliseconds > and the value indicated in the TLV." > > > > Editorial: > ---------- > > Section 4.2.1.3: s/like an combination/like a combination/ > > > > Best regards > > Michael _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf