From nobody Tue May 9 01:47:26 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-dir@ietf.org Delivered-To: int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AAEE129B4B; Tue, 9 May 2017 01:47:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Zhen Cao To: Cc: manet@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-multipath.all@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.50.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149431964538.10555.11264594833770083998@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 01:47:25 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Int-dir] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-multipath-12 X-BeenThere: int-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: "This list is for discussion between the members of the Internet Area directorate." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 08:47:25 -0000 Reviewer: Zhen Cao Review result: Ready with Issues I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for this draft. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document editors and shepherds should treat these comments just like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more details of the INT directorate, see . I believe this document is ready to publish almost as it is. One issue I found during my review lies in Sec. 8.4 where IPv4 loose source routing being discussed. To avoid unnecessary fragmentation, I am suggesting the following wording change: S/ If the length of the path (n) is greater than MAX_SRC_HOPS (Section 5), only the "key" routers in the path are kept... / If the length of the path (n) is greater than MAX_SRC_HOPS (Section 5), or the adding of source routing header exceeds the path MTU, only the "key" routers in the path are kept... Cheers, Zhen From nobody Tue May 9 15:54:20 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78C3612EAE2; Tue, 9 May 2017 15:54:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.021 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.021 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=jiaziyi.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8oB-ipFGCeDN; Tue, 9 May 2017 15:54:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o52.zoho.com (sender-of-o52.zoho.com [135.84.80.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21076124B0A; Tue, 9 May 2017 15:54:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1494370448; s=jiazi; d=jiaziyi.com; i=ietf@jiaziyi.com; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; l=1359; bh=Bzue9mViNgdVB7Uz9WuBYlUb1OYFB5imytMOYWW0LZQ=; b=g57wIac15mW3hxxkQU3nTfe7YVFrLEtQJNnpEwu40cAaZn6lPM/p6FSgAugMJGg/ XL6Iw2vY9Tqi723KjaXF1jE/XrZ7IqYX7Ud4f4DQXyXqY5me5CCGorLTbxErnihcGyA dJWZONCmwXnGwldbip+5gGQ8GbcVsEUzKz1LltkI= Received: from [192.168.1.101] (230.248.86.88.rdns.comcable.net [88.86.248.230]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 149437044828451.717761972135236; Tue, 9 May 2017 15:54:08 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Jiazi Yi In-Reply-To: <149431964538.10555.11264594833770083998@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 00:54:06 +0200 Cc: int-dir@ietf.org, manet@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-multipath.all@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <11D61838-1EE5-475B-BCBA-B4DC1D6C5BB4@jiaziyi.com> References: <149431964538.10555.11264594833770083998@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Zhen Cao X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) X-ZohoMailClient: External Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Int-dir] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-multipath-12 X-BeenThere: int-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "This list is for discussion between the members of the Internet Area directorate." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 22:54:17 -0000 Dear Zhen, Thanks very much for your review. We will update the draft based on the comments and submit a new revision. best Jiazi > On 9 May 2017, at 10:47, Zhen Cao wrote: > > Reviewer: Zhen Cao > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for this draft. These > comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area > Directors. Document editors and shepherds should treat these comments > just like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors > and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments that have > been received. For more details of the INT directorate, see > . > > I believe this document is ready to publish almost as it is. > > One issue I found during my review lies in Sec. 8.4 where IPv4 loose > source routing being discussed. To avoid unnecessary fragmentation, I > am suggesting the following wording change: > > S/ If the length of the path (n) is greater than MAX_SRC_HOPS > (Section 5), only the "key" routers in the path are kept... > / If the length of the path (n) is greater than MAX_SRC_HOPS > (Section 5), or the adding of source routing header exceeds the > path MTU, > only the "key" routers in the path are kept... > > Cheers, > Zhen > > >