[Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-bmwg-bgp-basic-convergence-04.txt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-bmwg-bgp-basic-convergence-04.txt
    Basic BGP Convergence Benchmarking Methodology for Data Plane
                             Convergence
Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
Review Date: 30-October-2014
IETF LC End Date: 10-November-2014
IESG Telechat date: N/A

Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as an informational RFC.

Major issues: None.

Minor issues:

The four subtraction in step of section 5.1.2 appear to be backwards, as they subtract a later event time from an earlier event time.

Should the test procedures recommend using CLI / SNMP / NetConf to verify adjacency establishment, rather than just observing / waiting for KeepAlives?

What is meant by "Restart" in step H for 5.2.1. Or conversely, why bother draining the queue, since you will just refill it in an uncontrolled fashion? The step first waits for queues to drain. But there needs to be traffic flowing before step I. It is unclear why one would drain the queue, and the refill the queue an unspecified amount. (This also appears in step H of 5.3)

Given normal BGP behavior which requires that only one route be selected, shouldn't 5.2.3 be more specific about what sort of ECMP can be tested?

I believe 5.3 step J has a cut-and-paste where it should have a subtraction?

Isn't it a bit tricky to record the time of a non-event? (5.6 step 10, Record the time when no traffic is observed.) Deciding when an expected packet was not received seems to have more uncertainty than recording when a packet is received. Could the withdrawl test been done by having a less preferred route and observing traffic arriving on that less-preferred route?

Nits/editorial comments:

Step F of 5.2.1 should note that the time of the shutdown will be named Shutdown time.

In section 5.4.1 the relevant steps are missing the "This time is called" text. Also should there be a step between G and H to actually observe the restarted traffic?

Why does 5.7 J exist. The test is complete by then, isn't it. If J is prep for "Repeat the test"< then it should not have "Restart."





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]