Dear All,
Please consider my comments for the LC:
- I'm concerned with the very title of the document, Methodology for benchmarking MPLS protection mechanisms, even though only MPLS-TE FRR being considered while LSP end-to-end and segment protection implicitly being kept out of the scope.
- I've found several textual inaccuracies related to both MPLS and BFD to make me wonder if the document was liasioned to MPLS WG.
- List of acronyms is missing - PLR, OIR, LOS, AIS, etc.
- Introduction. I think that for "planned link or node failure" MBB is more efficient and useful than FRR. But MBB is not being mentioned in the document.
- Introduction. "A correlated failure is the simultaneous occurrence of two or more failures." Personally, as correlated events I consider events with cause-effect relationship.
- Introduction. Path restoration after FRR discussion does not appear logical, in the scope of benchmarking document.
- Document Scope. "Protection from Bi-directional Forwarding Detection (BFD) is outside the scope of this document." I frankly couldn't decode this sentense.
- Document Scope. Several references to Path Restoration as Re-optimization - doubt that it belongs in the document at all.
- Sections 6.1.1 through 6.2.4 - what is relevance of listing numbers of labels in the stack?
- Peerformance of control plane should be outside of the scope of benchmarking as it is end-to-end metrics, not explicitly of DUT.
Regards,
Greg
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf