Joel -
I don’t fully understand the rest of your comment then. You said:
" And that document does appear to define the SRMS."
(where "that document" refers to draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution).
But the conflict resolution document never defined an SRMS - it merely described how SRMS advertisements were used in the context of conflict resolution.
So if you are unsatisfied with the "SRMS definition" in ldp-interop draft I think you need to be more clear as to what you think is lacking.
I leave it to the draft authors to resolve this issue with you.
Les
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joel Halpern Direct <jmh.direct@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 1:16 PM
> To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg@xxxxxxxxx>; Joel Halpern
> <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; gen-art@xxxxxxxx
> Cc: draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop.all@xxxxxxxx;
> spring@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [spring] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-spring-segment-
> routing-ldp-interop-11
>
> Thanks Les. I wondered if that were the case.
>
> Looking again at the draft, the problem then is that section 4.2 of the subject
> draft is not a normative definition of an SRMS. It states the general
> functionality, and then provides an example of how it would work in the
> given scenario.
>
> If the text were enhanced to be an effective normative definition of an
> SRMS, then that would also resolve the quesiton of the intended status of
> the draft.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
> On 5/14/18 4:12 PM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote:
> > Joel -
> >
> > I am not an author of this draft - but I am an author on the referenced IS-IS
> draft - which I assume is one of the drafts mentioned in your comment:
> >
> >> Server). Looking at the relevant routing protocol document, they point
> to
> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution-05 as
> the
> >> defining source for the SRMS.
> >
> > The IGP document references in the ldp-interop draft are stale. Newer
> versions of the IGP drafts have been published and they no longer reference
> draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - a draft which is no longer active.
> >
> > HTH
> >
> > Les
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: spring <spring-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Joel Halpern
> >> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 1:01 PM
> >> To: gen-art@xxxxxxxx
> >> Cc: draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop.all@xxxxxxxx;
> >> spring@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: [spring] Genart last call review of
> >> draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-
> >> ldp-interop-11
> >>
> >> Reviewer: Joel Halpern
> >> Review result: Ready with Issues
> >>
> >> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> >> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by
> >> the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like
> >> any other last call comments.
> >>
> >> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> >>
> >> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> >>
> >> Document: draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop-11
> >> Reviewer: Joel Halpern
> >> Review Date: 2018-05-14
> >> IETF LC End Date: 2018-05-24
> >> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> >>
> >> Summary: This document appears to be ready for publication as an RFC.
> >> The question of whether it is an Informational RFC or a Proposed
> >> Standards track RFC is one that the ADs should examine.
> >>
> >> Major issues:
> >> This document is quite readable, and quite useful. If my reading below
> >> (minor comment about section 4.2) is wrong, then everything is fine.
> >> However, reading the text, it does not appear to define SRMS. Rather,
> it
> >> describes a good way to use SRMS to achive smooth SR - LDP
> >> integration and
> >> migration. As such, this seems to me to be a really good Informational
> >> Document.
> >>
> >> Minor issues:
> >> Section 4.2 states that it defines the SRMS (Segment Routing Mapping
> >> Server). Looking at the relevant routing protocol document, they point
> to
> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution-05 as
> the
> >> defining source for the SRMS. And that document does appear to
> >> define the
> >> SRMS.
> >>
> >> Nits/editorial comments:
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> spring mailing list
> >> spring@xxxxxxxx
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
