I meant "this" (the document under review), not "that"
(conflict-resolution). Since the other documents I found indicated that
conflict resolution defined it, I assumed it did. Given that
conflict-resolution is a dead document, something needs to actually
define the SRMS.
Yours,
Joel
On 5/14/18 4:32 PM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote:
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draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - a draft which is no longer active.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
