From adrian@olddog.co.uk Sun Nov 4 05:39:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD9521F85D6; Sun, 4 Nov 2012 05:39:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.668 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.558, BAYES_05=-1.11] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X46tv2xrl3j4; Sun, 4 Nov 2012 05:39:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86CB521F85B0; Sun, 4 Nov 2012 05:39:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA4DdaDQ001949; Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:39:38 GMT Received: from 950129200 (dhcp-46f8.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.70.248]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA4DdXU8001934 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:39:34 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: , , , "Allison Mankin" Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:39:34 -0000 Message-ID: <007401cdba91$d506a860$7f13f920$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac26kdFvVf7lHKlTS/2ePj6KC2054w== Content-Language: en-gb Subject: [RTG-DIR] Meeting room for Routing ADs Office Hours X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2012 13:39:41 -0000 Hi, We will be in room 202 Sunday afternoon from 14.30 to 16.00 All welcome for discussion of specific, general, or non-existent issues. Adrian and Stewart From adrian@olddog.co.uk Tue Nov 6 07:41:00 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF7D621F89E9 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 07:41:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.628 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.628 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.518, BAYES_05=-1.11] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id or2vyliXNrM0 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 07:41:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 323A821F89E5 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 07:40:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA6Fewhf023445 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:40:58 GMT Received: from 950129200 (dhcp-13b5.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.19.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA6Fet99023415 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:40:57 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:40:57 -0000 Message-ID: <006101cdbc35$1eaa7ab0$5bff7010$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac28NMNk9lbua/i4TMeSmqTvMlR+zw== Content-Language: en-gb Subject: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 15:41:01 -0000 Following up on Acee's local knowledge, Max Lager's 320 Peachtree Street Northeast look plausible. The two conditions will be: WG chairs don't also decide to go there. They can fit us in. I will let the WG chairs settle on a venue (looks like they'll go somewhere else) and then book. Watch this space. Adrian PS I currently have 13 Acks in the Doodle poll. If you intend coming and haven't done so yet, please drop an entry into the poll. From Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com Tue Nov 6 07:43:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B9C821F84A7 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 07:43:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m2XUU5nyk3j6 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 07:43:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail1.bemta4.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta4.messagelabs.com [85.158.143.242]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B38E821F8427 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 07:43:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [85.158.143.99:39805] by server-1.bemta-4.messagelabs.com id E3/5B-27934-FFF29905; Tue, 06 Nov 2012 15:42:55 +0000 X-Env-Sender: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com X-Msg-Ref: server-5.tower-216.messagelabs.com!1352216574!28523411!2 X-Originating-IP: [147.234.242.234] X-StarScan-Received: X-StarScan-Version: 6.6.1.8; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 26278 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2012 15:42:55 -0000 Received: from ilptbmg01-out.ecitele.com (HELO ilptbmg01-out.ecitele.com) (147.234.242.234) by server-5.tower-216.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2012 15:42:55 -0000 X-AuditID: 93eaf2e7-b7f7d6d000002888-10-50992a05d376 Received: from ILPTEXCH02.ecitele.com ( [147.234.245.181]) by ilptbmg01-out.ecitele.com (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id AD.F3.10376.50A29905; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 17:17:25 +0200 (IST) Received: from ILPTWPVEXCA01.ecitele.com (172.31.244.224) by ILPTEXCH02.ecitele.com (147.234.245.181) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.264.0; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 17:42:40 +0200 Received: from ILPTWPVEXMB03.ecitele.com ([fe80::91b4:8f74:ce44:f190]) by ILPTWPVEXCA01.ecitele.com ([fe80::ac15:43ab:d541:dfa7%12]) with mapi id 14.01.0379.000; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 17:42:40 +0200 From: Alexander Vainshtein To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , "rtg-dir@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner Thread-Index: Ac28NMNk9lbua/i4TMeSmqTvMlR+zwAAGb3g Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:42:39 +0000 Message-ID: References: <006101cdbc35$1eaa7ab0$5bff7010$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <006101cdbc35$1eaa7ab0$5bff7010$@olddog.co.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.4.42.92] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA3VTXUgUURTmzqzraE5M489eLWq4WUq15ZrJpq5EVNSTCyVFQTnu3naHdme3 nUncetHoIUxqtUDdCreQNssILMhKKs2HNPsx+pHSyDKqrR6Kfo20mR01IbpP3znnu993OJxD keyoPo0SRBn7RN6F9PG6w5HPX4zsggZrVqgp1/yjup80h1pex64g1jY1/STWnr7QDKzE5gpQ wIuiR+ZlzNmxZLMgq08o421+xAl2CzIhzuvibdiNRdmCeK8Xi3ZUGM/98woUmiByWLR57ILo sKB164uMZvOy5UYTKpw/17Q0P36DU5A4bHTzgotzY0niHZhTMiUXSWdt4DnprY0tvx5pJipA d0wVoCjI5MCR/lVVIE6BKfD+8/P6KhBPscx1AF/2fRwPLgF4NTxAaEEXgF2BVkL9omcssPXs oF7FScwm2NB2SKfiRCYDfntaR2j5THgz1EpqOBuGH0SiHB2TDiNtY9G/NGOFQ4Fb0TzL5MFH r29H83FMPtw/8DCKgdLe956WqCbJGODT4UZCa5uBTe33SA0nw3evRmM0PBvubX4Yq/EXwdDV z3oNL4SnTrwnNd8ZsLtheNzXCHtuVY1rpsKO0/26AIDBKXbBKVLBKVLBKVIhoDsDkgWXVy51 O7JMi7FNkLELL7Z53K1AW5g3bWCkMb0TMBRACTSXXm9lY/gyye/uBKkUgZLpJxkNVnZ6qcfu d/KSc5tvlwtLnQBSJEqic1OUGm3n/buxzzNRWq1Ms4ZMm2bzKKspytuWZmX9P0AGOlyxsYhl HMo67sDYi30TOrMoCkF6/hLFYoYPO3D5dsEl/y0TVJzaRoLSBlQ5tOTl3ZLg0Oo9wEhVVp8c AqxO9Ig4zUATKolRSc5d4qTOxNlEgEEZQCJtUVkJylFNKkUUE0IxkR7XqybK2UyW0ipAS57e n/6BHBz62Ze6I7H93NY+w4C4qgOX1Hw7TicUB8IDx65seYNi95gvs9bg8IaOt5nBl9l35hxc ua/gy5rO4tzeG+SR3uzwuhsoMfyR+lr8wvis+23SHcNXk+H40Z2/fwx2gV/fc2TrmpSimrGZ 0+RPlS0Hxng9Xbf107W788xIJzl50wLSJ/F/AC5eg3ARBAAA Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 15:43:27 -0000 Adrian, all, I will be with you in my thoughts since (unfortunately) I cannot attend in p= erson. Regards, and have a nice dinner Sasha > -----Original Message----- > From: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 5:41 PM > To: rtg-dir@ietf.org > Subject: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner > > Following up on Acee's local knowledge, Max Lager's 320 Peachtree Street > Northeast look plausible. > > The two conditions will be: > > WG chairs don't also decide to go there. > They can fit us in. > > I will let the WG chairs settle on a venue (looks like they'll go somewher= e > else) and then book. > > Watch this space. > > Adrian > > PS > I currently have 13 Acks in the Doodle poll. If you intend coming and have= n't > done so yet, please drop an entry into the poll. This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains informat= ion which is CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If yo= u have received this transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phon= e or fax, and then delete the original and all copies thereof. From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Tue Nov 6 07:52:47 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C2621F87AB for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 07:52:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pT8keJShLRHR for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 07:52:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2C0321F89B5 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 07:52:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id qA6FvD08003988; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 09:57:14 -0600 Received: from EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se (147.117.188.87) by eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se (147.117.20.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.279.1; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 10:52:08 -0500 Received: from EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.118]) by EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 10:52:08 -0500 From: Acee Lindem To: "" Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner Thread-Index: Ac28NMNk9lbua/i4TMeSmqTvMlR+zwAK9E4A Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:52:07 +0000 Message-ID: <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE470168F0@EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se> References: <006101cdbc35$1eaa7ab0$5bff7010$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <006101cdbc35$1eaa7ab0$5bff7010$@olddog.co.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.134] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-32-247772014"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 15:52:47 -0000 --Apple-Mail-32-247772014 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii It looks like WG chairs may be going there so possibly we should go = somewhere else. I've eaten at both "Sweet Georgia's Juke Joint" and = "White Oak" and the I wouldn't go back to the former. The latter was = good but somewhat pricey for Atlanta. Other suggestions are welcome.=20 On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Following up on Acee's local knowledge, Max Lager's 320 Peachtree = Street > Northeast look plausible. >=20 > The two conditions will be: >=20 > WG chairs don't also decide to go there. > They can fit us in. >=20 > I will let the WG chairs settle on a venue (looks like they'll go = somewhere > else) and then book. >=20 > Watch this space. >=20 > Adrian >=20 > PS > I currently have 13 Acks in the Doodle poll. If you intend coming and = haven't > done so yet, please drop an entry into the poll. >=20 --Apple-Mail-32-247772014 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIM8jCCBDQw ggMcoAMCAQICECFWwVQHDV12M/Sr0yNv0sYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwOTERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJp Y3Nzb24xJDAiBgNVBAMMG0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMTAeFw0xMDEwMDEyMDA0 NTlaFw0xMzEwMDEyMDA0NDhaMG8xETAPBgNVBAoMCEVyaWNzc29uMR8wHQYDVQQDDBZBY2VlIExp bmRlbSBMaW5kZW0gSUlJMRAwDgYDVQQFEwdlYWxmbGluMScwJQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhhhY2VlLmxp bmRlbUBlcmljc3Nvbi5jb20wgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAI/Dc9ALiZuBMyuv bsc3eBxjXZpMi45Z0vzsUQZTJGTBeY7p9JsdzXC9J1uMisBxYVi39R3KJo6I4hXVp9wrA1rxh4AE bnP1+Gxfpj33uWEFYbBnVAJkIWYWF7CYTn8Zm/yd13vPXtuGA6ESeLnnJafwC9Y0YwUQ+4HX7PNv uauVAgMBAAGjggGEMIIBgDCBwAYDVR0fBIG4MIG1MIGyoIGvoIGshjdodHRwOi8vY3JsLnRydXN0 LnRlbGlhLmNvbS9Fcmljc3Nvbk5MSW5kaXZpZHVhbENBMDEuY3JshnFsZGFwOi8vbGRhcC50cnVz dC50ZWxpYS5jb20vY249RXJpY3Nzb24lMjBOTCUyMEluZGl2aWR1YWwlMjBDQTAxLG89RXJpY3Nz b24/Y2VydGlmaWNhdGVyZXZvY2F0aW9ubGlzdDtiaW5hcnk/YmFzZTAjBgNVHREEHDAagRhhY2Vl LmxpbmRlbUBlcmljc3Nvbi5jb20wRgYDVR0gBD8wPTA7BgYqhXBrAQEwMTAvBggrBgEFBQcCARYj aHR0cDovL3d3dy5lcmljc3Nvbi5jb20vbGVnYWwuc2h0bWwwHQYDVR0OBBYEFAgOzAPuplmPr7C1 BTqV94OyqUdhMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFJYnw7jepV9dRD45UuVFsXZfYzCbMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIF oDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAE1gyNW6c2t/YsLxW5sm67+gVGK0Lnge4ub+k8dgGrK7Mj7em nkOIFkjdv/tqdJ/SoUy/WEkBXba2TfpZ+lfluMgLYux1vSvqBUxYBsUHeNth2Q/Y6A9sCaDTBPlK vZ2jLz814NavrVfgTCLdxX6zNtGdwzhviz+FyqyxYF43Q86RP8Gd/Npaz1W8pmYAHm0+lezuTx5k F3Av3+SaZ/MR6s+RWuXEIdED36ajeQz+OG8Mh3nplofzdrOeoWGDz53YlfRhgj+TXo+H1lclZAvD WVaMMXPdb27h9Hngsq87dkCW9uAyv8DI993rdhqzlEgUyQIL32icAXfTmTYgoGPOwjCCBEUwggMt oAMCAQICEBPJ6v/eJq2p3KTKI4GDR+MwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwRDEaMBgGA1UECgwRVGVsaWFT b25lcmEgR3JvdXAxJjAkBgNVBAMMHVRlbGlhU29uZXJhIFB1YmxpYyBSb290IENBIHYxMB4XDTA2 MTAwNjEwMDA1M1oXDTE2MTAwMjA1MDQxN1owOTERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJpY3Nzb24xJDAiBgNVBAMM G0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoC ggEBALYQd+Q1HuuHxDyNGFlEPzCxuPPFO5W2xyr+nqCVnNJ4QYFe1HACqavqNLwUGIqIEyHv1rLn fub9LBc7dQpRHjl/dggin0ONOFJ36nbGEbfHjLJz2BzOWvwl84Sc+Fx09IrDU/SZSWFSfhqTu3TT 39h79brHdRkdPBUgBYgsiFKriHI0TjP5G8628H27BDzqUpzGLSYWgt6/tpwuOH5lcfNfHWMcCYXR lobv0Klu8lxG5amWqAnqrH6ECOyYJTRbHTsaTIZOHy9Qw/0eXPujKT7tU5xxSI2SdceJqzUbAz2o FRQ6Px7/GydpM/Rl+qYoGPcauHUL1aSeVJZqDFqcIF0CAwEAAaOCATwwggE4MBIGA1UdEwEB/wQI MAYBAf8CAQAwRgYDVR0gBD8wPTA7BgcqhXAjAgEBMDAwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0dHBzOi8vcmVw b3NpdG9yeS50cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20wgYkGA1UdHwSBgTB/MH2ge6B5hndsZGFwOi8vbGRhcC50 cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20vY249VGVsaWFTb25lcmElMjBQdWJsaWMlMjBSb290JTIwQ0ElMjB2MSxv PVRlbGlhU29uZXJhJTIwR3JvdXA/YXV0aG9yaXR5cmV2b2NhdGlvbmxpc3Q/YmFzZTAOBgNVHQ8B Af8EBAMCAQYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFJYnw7jepV9dRD45UuVFsXZfYzCbMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFEXb8I+4 GmKhqCMbY4g4o9vgGmLxMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQB2AEoqQz+M3Ra9alkpn/YnwhXIv6tP jhUvSuNs00Nhd0T9XhlIU3a65CaB/UKSqnayE0t7Q0Qq3r+x/GK3in/mik8i/PK2/q8HutzYFSzz 6Npztpo2JG7AEKOJPVaeebjng45m6vNC7RIfzU9sG2LBR/hewS8s6dFFn70w795xUwJBWZ67OzIK XrIVVvHTOYpbWA+MESKAXwFhnVONrOTWlVwrMUi4HbiPWpOk+xQbgehCEi7mu3cXsaU1Xq3kMXui NuC7VKoob8mFO9o9RT+dlirD2uRXwNpvCu3but6Kyhu0+nvy2iXGKjdlxlWTsdDyulXYz+OYCMZ9 lFWRzMIPMIIEbTCCA1WgAwIBAgIRAJywjASay5cieGNithuGWj0wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwOjEZ MBcGA1UEChMQUlNBIFNlY3VyaXR5IEluYzEdMBsGA1UECxMUUlNBIFNlY3VyaXR5IDIwNDggVjMw HhcNMDYxMDMxMjA0MjI3WhcNMTYxMTAxMTU0MjI1WjBEMRowGAYDVQQKDBFUZWxpYVNvbmVyYSBH cm91cDEmMCQGA1UEAwwdVGVsaWFTb25lcmEgUHVibGljIFJvb3QgQ0EgdjEwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3 DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDKTxADapCAq3mplX4R4gNt+WZe5QKGnaVEQSyY7lICKF5DuVdW PMLHDjzhw5IzDd860ZZx/0VrhGB3DmP4SDIWCKo2PxvY5NckdBWPWp/T2uaQdOAwgqHpN0pe1X7/ jel59WsWYXKGg/81Wth73ZK/geE7Gz9Pvj1LU6N4YhLMgooxKnCS+ZjB5icWAg+Qd1QpQhF46H1i bp6LsBWDp56MPpg8F5X6y7MGVcKYLdnLOPs84uxRW9qs1kBopzQBj6s5SyVh8A+j5liDBjghXYpw /+paGEdqHPeSFYxZKeJatmjEKLYlxcZWRKf436KvQA9jBhMEmytMNbGicR1mRH6tAgMBAAGjggFi MIIBXjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQHw1EwpKrpRa41JPr/JCwz0LGdjDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQURdvwj7gaYqGo IxtjiDij2+AaYvEwEgYDVR0TAQH/BAgwBgEB/wIBBDCBhQYDVR0gBH4wfDA9BgkqhkiG9w0FBgEw MDAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cHM6Ly9yZXBvc2l0b3J5LnRydXN0LnRlbGlhLmNvbTA7BgcqhXAj AgEBMDAwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0dHBzOi8vcmVwb3NpdG9yeS50cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20wcAYD VR0fBGkwZzBloGOgYYZfaHR0cDovL3d3dy5yc2FzZWN1cml0eS5jb20vcHJvZHVjdHMva2Vvbi9y ZXBvc2l0b3J5L2NlcnRpZmljYXRlX3N0YXR1cy9SU0FfU2VjdXJpdHlfMjA0OF92My5DUkwwDgYD VR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQAEXpos2CnIm7/872ytSrEHWZgvhOUEkUm2 5PWf/XkWko41TaL9vIS1S6AdWChNqWmnYiS7GfaIiDM9s1D6K7hidWBDOm46bNdM3ZwhMyDCfkDJ SgeJ0w+7YmjvChu7gWqDZCsbtZ5gA1ixCTdDnuZB67JGSPGW6r73coraDP8diOpiQouMvM6bKuTP BH/1poLccsUxsKgrQ23JC9LWCRb8cYHkZjXFH1K44TsIl5Lne2oT0JI3pwdA2v6jO4p/OLHntP+n pjwPbedMPUZkDYCkd3LSxj8c3JTxtA8SlPCtIHE1hh65xihg1JRIliSphrqr9kbfwHdeVxPdOI5G tDYPMYICEjCCAg4CAQEwTTA5MREwDwYDVQQKDAhFcmljc3NvbjEkMCIGA1UEAwwbRXJpY3Nzb24g TkwgSW5kaXZpZHVhbCBDQTAxAhAhVsFUBw1ddjP0q9Mjb9LGMAkGBSsOAwIaBQCgggEbMBgGCSqG SIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTEyMTEwNjE1NTIwN1owIwYJKoZI hvcNAQkEMRYEFLyiASjaqFy8b45Pylk2mRXWN0O7MFwGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDFPME0wOTERMA8GA1UE CgwIRXJpY3Nzb24xJDAiBgNVBAMMG0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMQIQIVbBVAcN XXYz9KvTI2/SxjBeBgsqhkiG9w0BCRACCzFPoE0wOTERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJpY3Nzb24xJDAiBgNV BAMMG0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMQIQIVbBVAcNXXYz9KvTI2/SxjANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQEFAASBgBxN+orRwjZEQRgQ5J8UiELTKym+ixa36hT4ZZSHtQ2HaWK6KvZABaIjYDnPzhxR ytSSt8FwOuSNIGNeEcnDciD/7hdDqfm46mdxiEz8f7xHfZo6TcJPe+ljYzgLCFYEXurBd2ruELPg RoAvHaNJKZepNrsPCYfjhucK8QvnlNPvAAAAAAAA --Apple-Mail-32-247772014-- From adrian@olddog.co.uk Wed Nov 7 06:54:24 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9825321F86D6 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:54:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.403 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.403 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.196, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gESxXZT8ZKkw for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:54:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (asmtp4.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E2F21F87BF for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:54:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA7EsIGi025906; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:54:19 GMT Received: from 950129200 (dhcp-13b5.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.19.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA7EsGn2025898 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:54:18 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Acee Lindem'" References: <006101cdbc35$1eaa7ab0$5bff7010$@olddog.co.uk> <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE470168F0@EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE470168F0@EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se> Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:54:17 -0000 Message-ID: <004801cdbcf7$c43230a0$4c9691e0$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQIJS45JerAYxGzmqZzxDBZtrvvodwIh5B/tl1ZJK+A= Content-Language: en-gb Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 14:54:24 -0000 OK. Scratch Max Lagers. I'll talk to the concierge. A > -----Original Message----- > From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com] > Sent: 06 November 2012 15:52 > To: > Cc: > Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner > > It looks like WG chairs may be going there so possibly we should go somewhere > else. I've eaten at both "Sweet Georgia's Juke Joint" and "White Oak" and the I > wouldn't go back to the former. The latter was good but somewhat pricey for > Atlanta. Other suggestions are welcome. > > On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > > > Following up on Acee's local knowledge, Max Lager's 320 Peachtree Street > > Northeast look plausible. > > > > The two conditions will be: > > > > WG chairs don't also decide to go there. > > They can fit us in. > > > > I will let the WG chairs settle on a venue (looks like they'll go somewhere > > else) and then book. > > > > Watch this space. > > > > Adrian > > > > PS > > I currently have 13 Acks in the Doodle poll. If you intend coming and haven't > > done so yet, please drop an entry into the poll. > > From david.sinicrope@ericsson.com Wed Nov 7 06:59:39 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D58321F8BD0 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:59:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id skQeoVoL4aps for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:59:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E026B21F8BBE for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:59:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id qA7F4Jev004283; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 09:04:46 -0600 Received: from EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se (147.117.188.87) by eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se (147.117.20.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.279.1; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 09:59:36 -0500 Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 09:59:35 -0500 From: David Sinicrope To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , Acee Lindem Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner Thread-Index: Ac28NMNk9lbua/i4TMeSmqTvMlR+zwAK9E4AADBFr4D//62pgA== Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:59:35 +0000 Message-ID: <871EB8879748FA458598F046190628930335DE@EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <004801cdbcf7$c43230a0$4c9691e0$@olddog.co.uk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616 x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <6C62968AE84DD14FBB55333AC23CE2FD@ericsson.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 14:59:39 -0000 FWIW, I went to Pacific Rim Bistro last night (American Asian + Sushi). Food was good, about 15-20 for a main course. Google gives it a $$$ rating.We spent about $60 a head with wine and starters. It's set up as a bistro so the tables are small, but they may be able to put a few together for us. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Adrian Farrel Reply-To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" Date: Wednesday, November 7, 2012 9:54 AM To: Acee Lindem Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner >OK. Scratch Max Lagers. >I'll talk to the concierge. >A > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com] >> Sent: 06 November 2012 15:52 >> To: >> Cc: >> Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner >>=20 >> It looks like WG chairs may be going there so possibly we should go >>somewhere >> else. I've eaten at both "Sweet Georgia's Juke Joint" and "White Oak" >>and the >I >> wouldn't go back to the former. The latter was good but somewhat pricey >>for >> Atlanta. Other suggestions are welcome. >>=20 >> On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: >>=20 >> > Following up on Acee's local knowledge, Max Lager's 320 Peachtree >>Street >> > Northeast look plausible. >> > >> > The two conditions will be: >> > >> > WG chairs don't also decide to go there. >> > They can fit us in. >> > >> > I will let the WG chairs settle on a venue (looks like they'll go >>somewhere >> > else) and then book. >> > >> > Watch this space. >> > >> > Adrian >> > >> > PS >> > I currently have 13 Acks in the Doodle poll. If you intend coming and >haven't >> > done so yet, please drop an entry into the poll. >> > > > From lberger@labn.net Wed Nov 7 07:07:59 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E67FB21F8C02 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 07:07:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.283 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.283 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.316, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sfCQGTAZXhDH for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 07:07:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from oproxy11-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy11-pub.bluehost.com [173.254.64.10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 45B7021F8BEA for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 07:07:59 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 4872 invoked by uid 0); 7 Nov 2012 15:07:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by oproxy11.bluehost.com with SMTP; 7 Nov 2012 15:07:28 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=MXgsN73mR3EBZDqZPA8FgHHsaoHjayAsiH9yfpR8Yk0=; b=lz+AiChwx540LmXnfs81tl3mHIqU6CgeVUra9xPAC4fLUDyTz06EaqEi1SmZufrjwhUEphKG/VC0YbSqnJKZtIYlA9HLLRYiVQ/MnRxVC5BAtr/mmrGfVSLthVyZiR8X; Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:55517 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TW7E0-0002sV-2p; Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:07:28 -0700 Message-ID: <509A7931.6020700@labn.net> Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 10:07:29 -0500 From: Lou Berger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: adrian@olddog.co.uk References: <006101cdbc35$1eaa7ab0$5bff7010$@olddog.co.uk> <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE470168F0@EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se> <004801cdbcf7$c43230a0$4c9691e0$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <004801cdbcf7$c43230a0$4c9691e0$@olddog.co.uk> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net} Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, 'Acee Lindem' Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 15:08:00 -0000 Do we have a meeting time and location? Thanks. On 11/7/2012 9:54 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > OK. Scratch Max Lagers. > I'll talk to the concierge. > A > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com] >> Sent: 06 November 2012 15:52 >> To: >> Cc: >> Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner >> >> It looks like WG chairs may be going there so possibly we should go somewhere >> else. I've eaten at both "Sweet Georgia's Juke Joint" and "White Oak" and the > I >> wouldn't go back to the former. The latter was good but somewhat pricey for >> Atlanta. Other suggestions are welcome. >> >> On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: >> >>> Following up on Acee's local knowledge, Max Lager's 320 Peachtree Street >>> Northeast look plausible. >>> >>> The two conditions will be: >>> >>> WG chairs don't also decide to go there. >>> They can fit us in. >>> >>> I will let the WG chairs settle on a venue (looks like they'll go somewhere >>> else) and then book. >>> >>> Watch this space. >>> >>> Adrian >>> >>> PS >>> I currently have 13 Acks in the Doodle poll. If you intend coming and > haven't >>> done so yet, please drop an entry into the poll. >>> > > > > > > From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Wed Nov 7 07:50:33 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D426721F8BCA for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 07:50:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YgPN4YqLOfvD for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 07:50:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE89621F8B8E for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 07:50:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id qA7FtZpJ017054; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 09:55:41 -0600 Received: from EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se (147.117.188.87) by eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se (147.117.20.181) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.279.1; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:50:26 -0500 Received: from EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.118]) by EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:50:26 -0500 From: Acee Lindem To: David Sinicrope Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner Thread-Index: Ac28NMNk9lbua/i4TMeSmqTvMlR+zwAK9E4AADBFr4D//62pgIAAYgOA Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 15:50:25 +0000 Message-ID: <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE470177E2@EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se> References: <871EB8879748FA458598F046190628930335DE@EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <871EB8879748FA458598F046190628930335DE@EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.135] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-57-334068656"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , "rtg-dir@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 15:50:34 -0000 --Apple-Mail-57-334068656 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii We went to Truva and it wasn't bad - about the same price range. They = had larger tables - really big ones in a dining room that wasn't open at = the time. http://www.truvaatlanta.com/index.htm On Nov 7, 2012, at 9:59 AM, David Sinicrope wrote: > FWIW, I went to Pacific Rim Bistro last night (American Asian + = Sushi). > Food was good, about 15-20 for a main course. Google gives it a $$$ > rating.We spent about $60 a head with wine and starters. It's set up = as a > bistro so the tables are small, but they may be able to put a few = together > for us. >=20 > Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Adrian Farrel > Reply-To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" > Date: Wednesday, November 7, 2012 9:54 AM > To: Acee Lindem > Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" > Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner >=20 >> OK. Scratch Max Lagers. >> I'll talk to the concierge. >> A >>=20 >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com] >>> Sent: 06 November 2012 15:52 >>> To: >>> Cc: >>> Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner >>>=20 >>> It looks like WG chairs may be going there so possibly we should go >>> somewhere >>> else. I've eaten at both "Sweet Georgia's Juke Joint" and "White = Oak" >>> and the >> I >>> wouldn't go back to the former. The latter was good but somewhat = pricey >>> for >>> Atlanta. Other suggestions are welcome. >>>=20 >>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: >>>=20 >>>> Following up on Acee's local knowledge, Max Lager's 320 Peachtree >>> Street >>>> Northeast look plausible. >>>>=20 >>>> The two conditions will be: >>>>=20 >>>> WG chairs don't also decide to go there. >>>> They can fit us in. >>>>=20 >>>> I will let the WG chairs settle on a venue (looks like they'll go >>> somewhere >>>> else) and then book. >>>>=20 >>>> Watch this space. >>>>=20 >>>> Adrian >>>>=20 >>>> PS >>>> I currently have 13 Acks in the Doodle poll. If you intend coming = and >> haven't >>>> done so yet, please drop an entry into the poll. >>>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-57-334068656 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIM8jCCBDQw ggMcoAMCAQICECFWwVQHDV12M/Sr0yNv0sYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwOTERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJp Y3Nzb24xJDAiBgNVBAMMG0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMTAeFw0xMDEwMDEyMDA0 NTlaFw0xMzEwMDEyMDA0NDhaMG8xETAPBgNVBAoMCEVyaWNzc29uMR8wHQYDVQQDDBZBY2VlIExp bmRlbSBMaW5kZW0gSUlJMRAwDgYDVQQFEwdlYWxmbGluMScwJQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhhhY2VlLmxp bmRlbUBlcmljc3Nvbi5jb20wgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAI/Dc9ALiZuBMyuv bsc3eBxjXZpMi45Z0vzsUQZTJGTBeY7p9JsdzXC9J1uMisBxYVi39R3KJo6I4hXVp9wrA1rxh4AE bnP1+Gxfpj33uWEFYbBnVAJkIWYWF7CYTn8Zm/yd13vPXtuGA6ESeLnnJafwC9Y0YwUQ+4HX7PNv uauVAgMBAAGjggGEMIIBgDCBwAYDVR0fBIG4MIG1MIGyoIGvoIGshjdodHRwOi8vY3JsLnRydXN0 LnRlbGlhLmNvbS9Fcmljc3Nvbk5MSW5kaXZpZHVhbENBMDEuY3JshnFsZGFwOi8vbGRhcC50cnVz dC50ZWxpYS5jb20vY249RXJpY3Nzb24lMjBOTCUyMEluZGl2aWR1YWwlMjBDQTAxLG89RXJpY3Nz b24/Y2VydGlmaWNhdGVyZXZvY2F0aW9ubGlzdDtiaW5hcnk/YmFzZTAjBgNVHREEHDAagRhhY2Vl LmxpbmRlbUBlcmljc3Nvbi5jb20wRgYDVR0gBD8wPTA7BgYqhXBrAQEwMTAvBggrBgEFBQcCARYj aHR0cDovL3d3dy5lcmljc3Nvbi5jb20vbGVnYWwuc2h0bWwwHQYDVR0OBBYEFAgOzAPuplmPr7C1 BTqV94OyqUdhMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFJYnw7jepV9dRD45UuVFsXZfYzCbMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIF oDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAE1gyNW6c2t/YsLxW5sm67+gVGK0Lnge4ub+k8dgGrK7Mj7em nkOIFkjdv/tqdJ/SoUy/WEkBXba2TfpZ+lfluMgLYux1vSvqBUxYBsUHeNth2Q/Y6A9sCaDTBPlK vZ2jLz814NavrVfgTCLdxX6zNtGdwzhviz+FyqyxYF43Q86RP8Gd/Npaz1W8pmYAHm0+lezuTx5k F3Av3+SaZ/MR6s+RWuXEIdED36ajeQz+OG8Mh3nplofzdrOeoWGDz53YlfRhgj+TXo+H1lclZAvD WVaMMXPdb27h9Hngsq87dkCW9uAyv8DI993rdhqzlEgUyQIL32icAXfTmTYgoGPOwjCCBEUwggMt oAMCAQICEBPJ6v/eJq2p3KTKI4GDR+MwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwRDEaMBgGA1UECgwRVGVsaWFT b25lcmEgR3JvdXAxJjAkBgNVBAMMHVRlbGlhU29uZXJhIFB1YmxpYyBSb290IENBIHYxMB4XDTA2 MTAwNjEwMDA1M1oXDTE2MTAwMjA1MDQxN1owOTERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJpY3Nzb24xJDAiBgNVBAMM G0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoC ggEBALYQd+Q1HuuHxDyNGFlEPzCxuPPFO5W2xyr+nqCVnNJ4QYFe1HACqavqNLwUGIqIEyHv1rLn fub9LBc7dQpRHjl/dggin0ONOFJ36nbGEbfHjLJz2BzOWvwl84Sc+Fx09IrDU/SZSWFSfhqTu3TT 39h79brHdRkdPBUgBYgsiFKriHI0TjP5G8628H27BDzqUpzGLSYWgt6/tpwuOH5lcfNfHWMcCYXR lobv0Klu8lxG5amWqAnqrH6ECOyYJTRbHTsaTIZOHy9Qw/0eXPujKT7tU5xxSI2SdceJqzUbAz2o FRQ6Px7/GydpM/Rl+qYoGPcauHUL1aSeVJZqDFqcIF0CAwEAAaOCATwwggE4MBIGA1UdEwEB/wQI MAYBAf8CAQAwRgYDVR0gBD8wPTA7BgcqhXAjAgEBMDAwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0dHBzOi8vcmVw b3NpdG9yeS50cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20wgYkGA1UdHwSBgTB/MH2ge6B5hndsZGFwOi8vbGRhcC50 cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20vY249VGVsaWFTb25lcmElMjBQdWJsaWMlMjBSb290JTIwQ0ElMjB2MSxv PVRlbGlhU29uZXJhJTIwR3JvdXA/YXV0aG9yaXR5cmV2b2NhdGlvbmxpc3Q/YmFzZTAOBgNVHQ8B Af8EBAMCAQYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFJYnw7jepV9dRD45UuVFsXZfYzCbMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFEXb8I+4 GmKhqCMbY4g4o9vgGmLxMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQB2AEoqQz+M3Ra9alkpn/YnwhXIv6tP jhUvSuNs00Nhd0T9XhlIU3a65CaB/UKSqnayE0t7Q0Qq3r+x/GK3in/mik8i/PK2/q8HutzYFSzz 6Npztpo2JG7AEKOJPVaeebjng45m6vNC7RIfzU9sG2LBR/hewS8s6dFFn70w795xUwJBWZ67OzIK XrIVVvHTOYpbWA+MESKAXwFhnVONrOTWlVwrMUi4HbiPWpOk+xQbgehCEi7mu3cXsaU1Xq3kMXui NuC7VKoob8mFO9o9RT+dlirD2uRXwNpvCu3but6Kyhu0+nvy2iXGKjdlxlWTsdDyulXYz+OYCMZ9 lFWRzMIPMIIEbTCCA1WgAwIBAgIRAJywjASay5cieGNithuGWj0wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwOjEZ MBcGA1UEChMQUlNBIFNlY3VyaXR5IEluYzEdMBsGA1UECxMUUlNBIFNlY3VyaXR5IDIwNDggVjMw HhcNMDYxMDMxMjA0MjI3WhcNMTYxMTAxMTU0MjI1WjBEMRowGAYDVQQKDBFUZWxpYVNvbmVyYSBH cm91cDEmMCQGA1UEAwwdVGVsaWFTb25lcmEgUHVibGljIFJvb3QgQ0EgdjEwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3 DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDKTxADapCAq3mplX4R4gNt+WZe5QKGnaVEQSyY7lICKF5DuVdW PMLHDjzhw5IzDd860ZZx/0VrhGB3DmP4SDIWCKo2PxvY5NckdBWPWp/T2uaQdOAwgqHpN0pe1X7/ jel59WsWYXKGg/81Wth73ZK/geE7Gz9Pvj1LU6N4YhLMgooxKnCS+ZjB5icWAg+Qd1QpQhF46H1i bp6LsBWDp56MPpg8F5X6y7MGVcKYLdnLOPs84uxRW9qs1kBopzQBj6s5SyVh8A+j5liDBjghXYpw /+paGEdqHPeSFYxZKeJatmjEKLYlxcZWRKf436KvQA9jBhMEmytMNbGicR1mRH6tAgMBAAGjggFi MIIBXjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQHw1EwpKrpRa41JPr/JCwz0LGdjDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQURdvwj7gaYqGo IxtjiDij2+AaYvEwEgYDVR0TAQH/BAgwBgEB/wIBBDCBhQYDVR0gBH4wfDA9BgkqhkiG9w0FBgEw MDAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cHM6Ly9yZXBvc2l0b3J5LnRydXN0LnRlbGlhLmNvbTA7BgcqhXAj AgEBMDAwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0dHBzOi8vcmVwb3NpdG9yeS50cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20wcAYD VR0fBGkwZzBloGOgYYZfaHR0cDovL3d3dy5yc2FzZWN1cml0eS5jb20vcHJvZHVjdHMva2Vvbi9y ZXBvc2l0b3J5L2NlcnRpZmljYXRlX3N0YXR1cy9SU0FfU2VjdXJpdHlfMjA0OF92My5DUkwwDgYD VR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQAEXpos2CnIm7/872ytSrEHWZgvhOUEkUm2 5PWf/XkWko41TaL9vIS1S6AdWChNqWmnYiS7GfaIiDM9s1D6K7hidWBDOm46bNdM3ZwhMyDCfkDJ SgeJ0w+7YmjvChu7gWqDZCsbtZ5gA1ixCTdDnuZB67JGSPGW6r73coraDP8diOpiQouMvM6bKuTP BH/1poLccsUxsKgrQ23JC9LWCRb8cYHkZjXFH1K44TsIl5Lne2oT0JI3pwdA2v6jO4p/OLHntP+n pjwPbedMPUZkDYCkd3LSxj8c3JTxtA8SlPCtIHE1hh65xihg1JRIliSphrqr9kbfwHdeVxPdOI5G tDYPMYICEjCCAg4CAQEwTTA5MREwDwYDVQQKDAhFcmljc3NvbjEkMCIGA1UEAwwbRXJpY3Nzb24g TkwgSW5kaXZpZHVhbCBDQTAxAhAhVsFUBw1ddjP0q9Mjb9LGMAkGBSsOAwIaBQCgggEbMBgGCSqG SIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTEyMTEwNzE1NTAyM1owIwYJKoZI hvcNAQkEMRYEFMvDPukTFn0lf22y3PNJPdyVx1OTMFwGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDFPME0wOTERMA8GA1UE CgwIRXJpY3Nzb24xJDAiBgNVBAMMG0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMQIQIVbBVAcN XXYz9KvTI2/SxjBeBgsqhkiG9w0BCRACCzFPoE0wOTERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJpY3Nzb24xJDAiBgNV BAMMG0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMQIQIVbBVAcNXXYz9KvTI2/SxjANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQEFAASBgFsmtZcDfw4kLnkaCZ6XyWX4C7LpfGgWRS8YZv4oO64mdURrti+X2q6O05MCgWsw oreIB7OQ8SaT/4P2VLanVtEHah0zgKKtbzbiTUfp4XNgRuh42iObRzXTkGuBFTu15ZNsrqLp9SC9 oH+0wIN/WUv7jwD+wpUdAHjkxH/wR9liAAAAAAAA --Apple-Mail-57-334068656-- From adrian@olddog.co.uk Wed Nov 7 10:09:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B45D21F8BDA for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:09:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.421 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.421 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.178, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gwYyKSCUhZOy for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:09:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33D8821F887F for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:09:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA7I98Yl014213; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 18:09:08 GMT Received: from 950129200 (dhcp-13b5.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.19.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA7I968B014186 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 7 Nov 2012 18:09:08 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Lou Berger'" References: <006101cdbc35$1eaa7ab0$5bff7010$@olddog.co.uk> <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE470168F0@EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se> <004801cdbcf7$c43230a0$4c9691e0$@olddog.co.uk> <509A7931.6020700@labn.net> In-Reply-To: <509A7931.6020700@labn.net> Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 18:09:07 -0000 Message-ID: <003301cdbd12$fbd53f50$f37fbdf0$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQIJS45JerAYxGzmqZzxDBZtrvvodwIh5B/tArIUTOUDi+BuEpckj7bA Content-Language: en-gb Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 18:09:11 -0000 Let's meet 15 minutes after the end of the plenary in the hotel lobby. That means nominally 7.45 unless the plenary under/over-runs. I promise to have worked out where we are going! A > -----Original Message----- > From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net] > Sent: 07 November 2012 15:07 > To: adrian@olddog.co.uk > Cc: 'Acee Lindem'; rtg-dir@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner > > Do we have a meeting time and location? > > Thanks. > > On 11/7/2012 9:54 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > > OK. Scratch Max Lagers. > > I'll talk to the concierge. > > A > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com] > >> Sent: 06 November 2012 15:52 > >> To: > >> Cc: > >> Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Wednesday dinner > >> > >> It looks like WG chairs may be going there so possibly we should go > somewhere > >> else. I've eaten at both "Sweet Georgia's Juke Joint" and "White Oak" and the > > I > >> wouldn't go back to the former. The latter was good but somewhat pricey for > >> Atlanta. Other suggestions are welcome. > >> > >> On Nov 6, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > >> > >>> Following up on Acee's local knowledge, Max Lager's 320 Peachtree Street > >>> Northeast look plausible. > >>> > >>> The two conditions will be: > >>> > >>> WG chairs don't also decide to go there. > >>> They can fit us in. > >>> > >>> I will let the WG chairs settle on a venue (looks like they'll go somewhere > >>> else) and then book. > >>> > >>> Watch this space. > >>> > >>> Adrian > >>> > >>> PS > >>> I currently have 13 Acks in the Doodle poll. If you intend coming and > > haven't > >>> done so yet, please drop an entry into the poll. > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > From adrian@olddog.co.uk Wed Nov 7 13:27:22 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D9C021F8B4D for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 13:27:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.442 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.442 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.157, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SUKxKsQogYvP for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 13:27:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 237A021F8B35 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 13:27:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA7LRIG3016842 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 21:27:18 GMT Received: from 950129200 (dhcp-13b5.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.19.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qA7LRFGN016819 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 21:27:18 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 21:27:16 -0000 Message-ID: <001801cdbd2e$aaf85880$00e90980$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac29LqPzZxMmpN0zQ1KV3dqyaTLcmA== Content-Language: en-gb Subject: [RTG-DIR] Dinner confirmation X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 21:27:22 -0000 I have booked at Truva for 15 people in my name for around 8.10pm 7.45 in the lobby or make your own way. http://www.truvaatlanta.com/index.htm Adrian From ma-miyazawa@kddilabs.jp Wed Nov 7 17:18:20 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F9C221F8698; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 17:18:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3woW2L0SDIbI; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 17:18:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp (mandala.kddilabs.jp [IPv6:2001:200:601:12::16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2D221F8697; Wed, 7 Nov 2012 17:18:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2AA1174819A; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:18:09 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kddilabs.jp Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EbZfeB9QV-Dq; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:17:58 +0900 (JST) Received: from mail.cn.kddilabs.jp (yellow.lan.kddilabs.jp [172.19.98.10]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A71E17480C3; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:17:58 +0900 (JST) Received: from miyazawaVAIO (dhcp50.wlan.kddilabs.jp [172.19.110.50]) by mail.cn.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D5EE1E0002; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:17:58 +0900 (JST) From: "Masanori Miyazawa" To: "'Leeyoung'" , References: <507F1CC1.7070301@riw.us> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729089755@dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729089755@dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com> Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:17:55 +0900 Message-ID: <007301cdbd4e$e1876ce0$a49646a0$@kddilabs.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Content-language: ja Thread-index: AQIyibe83YGRiYVfUNFFTETwj1TyEwEMD8ZHlw0eRxA= X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 20:06:57 -0800 Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, 'CCAMP' , draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib.all@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 01:18:20 -0000 Dear Young, Thank you for your comments. We modified the document based on your = comments. Regarding IANA consideration section in your comments, we think that = this was typo, this should read "yyy". Is it right? However, we believe that IANA will know what is expected for this action = since it mirrors the actions they have applied for many other MIB = modules. >Section 9.1 --- Not clear what is being asked to the IANA. Would it be = more specific than =E2=80=9Ctransmission XXX=E2=80=9D? Need come = clarification >on this.=20 >The IANA is requested to assign {transmission XXX } to the TED-MIB=20 > module specified in this document. Regards, Masanori > -----Original Message----- > From: Leeyoung [mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com] > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 2:22 AM > To: rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org > Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib.all@tools.ietf.org; > rtg-dir@ietf.org; CCAMP > Subject: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt >=20 > Hello, >=20 > I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this = draft. > The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related > drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review. The = purpose > of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more > information about the Routing Directorate, please see > http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/routing.html > Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, = it > would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF = Last > Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through > discussion or by updating the draft. >=20 > Document: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt > Reviewer: Young Lee > Review Date: 17 October 2012 > IETF LC End Date: 18 October 2012 > Intended Status: Standard track >=20 > Summary: > I have no major concerns about this document that I think should be = resolved > before publication. >=20 > Comments: > This document is clearly written, but hard to read due to tight = indentations > and no spacing between major sections and paragraphs throughout the = whole > document. >=20 > Major Issues: > No major issues found. >=20 > Minor Issues: >=20 > Abstract >=20 > Indentations need to be fixed >=20 > Section 2 Introduction >=20 > S/ On the other side, MPLS/GMPLS based traffic > engineering has so far extended OSPF/ISIS routing protocol with TE > functionality [RFC4202], [RFC3630], [RFC5329], [RFC5307], = [RFC5305]. > / On the other side, MPLS/GMPLS based traffic > engineering has so far extended OSPF/ISIS routing protocol with TE > functionality per [RFC4202], [RFC3630], [RFC5329], [RFC5307] and > [RFC5305]. >=20 > Section 2 >=20 > S/ To manage such MPLS-TE/GMPLS networks effectively, routing > information associated with MPLS/GMPLS TE parameters (TED) is > preferred for the network management, however, there is no clear > definition of MPLS/GMPLS TE information in existing MIBs related to > OSPF(v2 and v3)/ISIS. > / To manage such MPLS-TE/GMPLS networks effectively, routing > information associated with MPLS/GMPLS TE parameters (TED) is > preferred for the network management; however, there is no clear > definition of MPLS/GMPLS TE information in existing MIBs related to > OSPF(v2 and v3)/ISIS. >=20 > Section 3.3 =E2=80=93 Please use consistent cases for all acronyms. >=20 > GMPLS: Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching > ISIS: Intermediate System to Intermediate System > LSA: Link state advertisement =EF=83=A0 Link State Advertisement > LSP: Label Switching Path > LSR: Label Switching Router > MIB: Management Information Base > OSPF: Open Shortest Path First > PSC: Packet switch capable -> Packet Switch Capable > SRLG: Shared risk link group -> Shared Risk Link Group > TE: Traffic Engineering > TED: Traffic Engineering Database > TDM: Time Division Multiplexing >=20 > Section 5.3 =E2=80=93 Style of consistency with Section 5.2 >=20 > S / Also, this is utilized independently because one or more local = interface > IP address sub TLVs may exist in the same Link-TLV. > / This is independently defined, because the Interface IP Address = sub-TLV > may > appear more than once within the same Link-TLV. >=20 > Section 5.4 and 5.5 --- same comment as above >=20 > Section 7 >=20 > - Not clear what these MIB Definitions are all about. If these need > to be supported, there should statements that these are additional = MIBS > to be added to existing MIB, etc. >=20 > Style of writing in the following sentence >=20 > S / These are the tables and objects and their > sensitivity/vulnerability: tedTable, tedLocalIfAddrTable, > tedRemoteIfAddrTable, tedSwCapTable and tedSrlgTable contain = topology > information for the MPLS/GMPLS network. > / The list of tables and objects that may be vulnerable or sensitive: > tedTable, tedLocalIfAddrTable, tedRemoteIfAddrTable, tedSwCapTable and > tedSrlgTable. They contain topology information for the MPLS/GMPLS = network. >=20 > Section 9.1 --- Not clear what is being asked to the IANA. Would it be = more > specific than =E2=80=9Ctransmission XXX=E2=80=9D? Need come = clarification on this. >=20 > The IANA is requested to assign {transmission XXX } to the TED-MIB > module specified in this document. >=20 >=20 >=20 > Nits: >=20 > Please correct the following issues generated by the Nits tool: >=20 > =3D=3D The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, = but was > first submitted before 10 November 2008. Should you add the > disclaimer? > (See the Legal Provisions document at > http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.). >=20 > -- The document date (October 4, 2012) is 14 days in the past. Is = this > intentional? >=20 >=20 > Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ >=20 > (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative > references > to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) >=20 > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC2328' is defined on line 1552, but no = explicit > reference was found in the text >=20 > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC4001' is defined on line 1566, but no = explicit > reference was found in the text >=20 > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC4801' is defined on line 1579, but no = explicit > reference was found in the text >=20 > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC5340' is defined on line 1587, but no = explicit > reference was found in the text >=20 > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC6340' is defined on line 1593, but no = explicit > reference was found in the text >=20 > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'ISO10589' is defined on line 1596, but no = explicit > reference was found in the text >=20 > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC4220' is defined on line 1625, but no = explicit > reference was found in the text >=20 > -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. = 'ISO10589' >=20 >=20 > Young From leeyoung@huawei.com Thu Nov 8 10:30:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C62D521F842F; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:30:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EiCnbFfXiItH; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:30:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F362821F8201; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:30:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AMN97040; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 18:30:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 18:30:20 +0000 Received: from DFWEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.134) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 18:30:32 +0000 Received: from dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com ([169.254.15.12]) by dfweml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.134]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:30:28 -0800 From: Leeyoung To: Masanori Miyazawa , "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt Thread-Index: AQHNvU7unr4fsjJsnk6JetJOr8fs8JfgQv/Q Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 18:30:27 +0000 Message-ID: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E17290A89DF@dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com> References: <507F1CC1.7070301@riw.us> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729089755@dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com> <007301cdbd4e$e1876ce0$a49646a0$@kddilabs.jp> In-Reply-To: <007301cdbd4e$e1876ce0$a49646a0$@kddilabs.jp> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.47.154.140] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , 'CCAMP' , "draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib.all@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 18:30:40 -0000 RGVhciBNYXNhbm9yaSwNCg0KSWYgdGhlIG5ldyBJQU5BIFRFRC1NSUIgYXNzaWdubWVudCBjYW5u b3QgYmUga25vd24gYSBwcmlvcmkgYmVmb3JlIHRoZSBzdWJtaXNzaW9uLCBJIGFtIGZpbmUgd2l0 aCB0aGUgY3VycmVudCBzdGF0ZW1lbnQuIA0KDQpUaGFua3MuDQpZb3VuZw0KDQotLS0tLU9yaWdp bmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogTWFzYW5vcmkgTWl5YXphd2EgW21haWx0bzptYS1taXlh emF3YUBrZGRpbGFicy5qcF0gDQpTZW50OiBXZWRuZXNkYXksIE5vdmVtYmVyIDA3LCAyMDEyIDc6 MTggUE0NClRvOiBMZWV5b3VuZzsgcnRnLWFkc0B0b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZw0KQ2M6IGRyYWZ0LWll dGYtY2NhbXAtZ21wbHMtdGVkLW1pYi5hbGxAdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmc7IHJ0Zy1kaXJAaWV0Zi5v cmc7ICdDQ0FNUCcNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJFOiBSdGdEaXIgcmV2aWV3OiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWNjYW1w LWdtcGxzLXRlZC1taWItMTQudHh0DQoNCkRlYXIgWW91bmcsDQoNClRoYW5rIHlvdSBmb3IgeW91 ciBjb21tZW50cy4gV2UgbW9kaWZpZWQgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50IGJhc2VkIG9uIHlvdXIgY29tbWVu dHMuDQpSZWdhcmRpbmcgSUFOQSBjb25zaWRlcmF0aW9uIHNlY3Rpb24gaW4geW91ciBjb21tZW50 cywgd2UgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB0aGlzIHdhcyB0eXBvLCB0aGlzIHNob3VsZCByZWFkICJ5eXkiLg0K SXMgaXQgcmlnaHQ/DQpIb3dldmVyLCB3ZSBiZWxpZXZlIHRoYXQgSUFOQSB3aWxsIGtub3cgd2hh dCBpcyBleHBlY3RlZCBmb3IgdGhpcyBhY3Rpb24gc2luY2UgaXQgbWlycm9ycyB0aGUgYWN0aW9u cyB0aGV5IGhhdmUgYXBwbGllZCBmb3IgbWFueSBvdGhlciBNSUIgbW9kdWxlcy4NCg0KPlNlY3Rp b24gOS4xIC0tLSBOb3QgY2xlYXIgd2hhdCBpcyBiZWluZyBhc2tlZCB0byB0aGUgSUFOQS4gV291 bGQgaXQgYmUgbW9yZSBzcGVjaWZpYyB0aGFuIOKAnHRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiBYWFjigJ0/IE5lZWQg Y29tZSBjbGFyaWZpY2F0aW9uID5vbiB0aGlzLiANCj5UaGUgSUFOQSBpcyByZXF1ZXN0ZWQgdG8g YXNzaWduIHt0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gWFhYIH0gdG8gdGhlIFRFRC1NSUIgDQo+ICBtb2R1bGUgc3Bl Y2lmaWVkIGluIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQuDQoNClJlZ2FyZHMsDQpNYXNhbm9yaQ0KDQo+IC0tLS0t T3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQo+IEZyb206IExlZXlvdW5nIFttYWlsdG86bGVleW91bmdA aHVhd2VpLmNvbV0NCj4gU2VudDogRnJpZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVyIDE5LCAyMDEyIDI6MjIgQU0NCj4g VG86IHJ0Zy1hZHNAdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gQ2M6IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtZ21wbHMt dGVkLW1pYi5hbGxAdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+IHJ0Zy1kaXJAaWV0Zi5vcmc7IENDQU1QDQo+ IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJ0Z0RpciByZXZpZXc6IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtY2NhbXAtZ21wbHMtdGVkLW1pYi0x NC50eHQNCj4gDQo+IEhlbGxvLA0KPiANCj4gSSBoYXZlIGJlZW4gc2VsZWN0ZWQgYXMgdGhlIFJv dXRpbmcgRGlyZWN0b3JhdGUgcmV2aWV3ZXIgZm9yIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQuDQo+IFRoZSBSb3V0aW5n IERpcmVjdG9yYXRlIHNlZWtzIHRvIHJldmlldyBhbGwgcm91dGluZyBvciByb3V0aW5nLXJlbGF0 ZWQNCj4gZHJhZnRzIGFzIHRoZXkgcGFzcyB0aHJvdWdoIElFVEYgbGFzdCBjYWxsIGFuZCBJRVNH IHJldmlldy4gVGhlIHB1cnBvc2UNCj4gb2YgdGhlIHJldmlldyBpcyB0byBwcm92aWRlIGFzc2lz dGFuY2UgdG8gdGhlIFJvdXRpbmcgQURzLiBGb3IgbW9yZQ0KPiBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBhYm91dCB0 aGUgUm91dGluZyBEaXJlY3RvcmF0ZSwgcGxlYXNlIHNlZQ0KPiBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3Jn L2llc2cvZGlyZWN0b3JhdGUvcm91dGluZy5odG1sDQo+IEFsdGhvdWdoIHRoZXNlIGNvbW1lbnRz IGFyZSBwcmltYXJpbHkgZm9yIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIFJvdXRpbmcgQURzLCBpdA0KPiB3b3Vs ZCBiZSBoZWxwZnVsIGlmIHlvdSBjb3VsZCBjb25zaWRlciB0aGVtIGFsb25nIHdpdGggYW55IG90 aGVyIElFVEYgTGFzdA0KPiBDYWxsIGNvbW1lbnRzIHRoYXQgeW91IHJlY2VpdmUsIGFuZCBzdHJp dmUgdG8gcmVzb2x2ZSB0aGVtIHRocm91Z2gNCj4gZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBvciBieSB1cGRhdGluZyB0 aGUgZHJhZnQuDQo+IA0KPiBEb2N1bWVudDogZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1jY2FtcC1nbXBscy10ZWQtbWli LTE0LnR4dA0KPiBSZXZpZXdlcjogWW91bmcgTGVlDQo+IFJldmlldyBEYXRlOiAxNyBPY3RvYmVy IDIwMTINCj4gSUVURiBMQyBFbmQgRGF0ZTogMTggT2N0b2JlciAyMDEyDQo+IEludGVuZGVkIFN0 YXR1czogU3RhbmRhcmQgdHJhY2sNCj4gDQo+IFN1bW1hcnk6DQo+IEkgaGF2ZSBubyBtYWpvciBj b25jZXJucyBhYm91dCB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IHRoYXQgSSB0aGluayBzaG91bGQgYmUgcmVzb2x2 ZWQNCj4gYmVmb3JlIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uLg0KPiANCj4gQ29tbWVudHM6DQo+IFRoaXMgZG9jdW1l bnQgaXMgY2xlYXJseSB3cml0dGVuLCBidXQgaGFyZCB0byByZWFkIGR1ZSB0byB0aWdodCBpbmRl bnRhdGlvbnMNCj4gYW5kIG5vIHNwYWNpbmcgYmV0d2VlbiBtYWpvciBzZWN0aW9ucyBhbmQgcGFy YWdyYXBocyB0aHJvdWdob3V0IHRoZSB3aG9sZQ0KPiBkb2N1bWVudC4NCj4gDQo+IE1ham9yIElz c3VlczoNCj4gTm8gbWFqb3IgaXNzdWVzIGZvdW5kLg0KPiANCj4gTWlub3IgSXNzdWVzOg0KPiAN Cj4gQWJzdHJhY3QNCj4gDQo+IEluZGVudGF0aW9ucyBuZWVkIHRvIGJlIGZpeGVkDQo+IA0KPiBT ZWN0aW9uIDIgSW50cm9kdWN0aW9uDQo+IA0KPiBTLyBPbiB0aGUgb3RoZXIgc2lkZSwgTVBMUy9H TVBMUyBiYXNlZCB0cmFmZmljDQo+ICAgIGVuZ2luZWVyaW5nIGhhcyBzbyBmYXIgZXh0ZW5kZWQg T1NQRi9JU0lTIHJvdXRpbmcgcHJvdG9jb2wgd2l0aCBURQ0KPiAgICBmdW5jdGlvbmFsaXR5IFtS RkM0MjAyXSwgW1JGQzM2MzBdLCBbUkZDNTMyOV0sIFtSRkM1MzA3XSwgW1JGQzUzMDVdLg0KPiAv IE9uIHRoZSBvdGhlciBzaWRlLCBNUExTL0dNUExTIGJhc2VkIHRyYWZmaWMNCj4gICAgZW5naW5l ZXJpbmcgaGFzIHNvIGZhciBleHRlbmRlZCBPU1BGL0lTSVMgcm91dGluZyBwcm90b2NvbCB3aXRo IFRFDQo+ICAgIGZ1bmN0aW9uYWxpdHkgcGVyIFtSRkM0MjAyXSwgW1JGQzM2MzBdLCBbUkZDNTMy OV0sIFtSRkM1MzA3XSBhbmQNCj4gW1JGQzUzMDVdLg0KPiANCj4gU2VjdGlvbiAyDQo+IA0KPiBT LyBUbyBtYW5hZ2Ugc3VjaCBNUExTLVRFL0dNUExTIG5ldHdvcmtzIGVmZmVjdGl2ZWx5LCByb3V0 aW5nDQo+ICAgIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGFzc29jaWF0ZWQgd2l0aCBNUExTL0dNUExTIFRFIHBhcmFt ZXRlcnMgKFRFRCkgaXMNCj4gICAgcHJlZmVycmVkIGZvciB0aGUgbmV0d29yayBtYW5hZ2VtZW50 LCBob3dldmVyLCB0aGVyZSBpcyBubyBjbGVhcg0KPiAgICBkZWZpbml0aW9uIG9mIE1QTFMvR01Q TFMgVEUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gaW4gZXhpc3RpbmcgTUlCcyByZWxhdGVkIHRvDQo+ICAgIE9TUEYo djIgYW5kIHYzKS9JU0lTLg0KPiAvIFRvIG1hbmFnZSBzdWNoIE1QTFMtVEUvR01QTFMgbmV0d29y a3MgZWZmZWN0aXZlbHksIHJvdXRpbmcNCj4gICAgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gYXNzb2NpYXRlZCB3aXRo IE1QTFMvR01QTFMgVEUgcGFyYW1ldGVycyAoVEVEKSBpcw0KPiAgICBwcmVmZXJyZWQgZm9yIHRo ZSBuZXR3b3JrIG1hbmFnZW1lbnQ7IGhvd2V2ZXIsIHRoZXJlIGlzIG5vIGNsZWFyDQo+ICAgIGRl ZmluaXRpb24gb2YgTVBMUy9HTVBMUyBURSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBpbiBleGlzdGluZyBNSUJzIHJl bGF0ZWQgdG8NCj4gICAgT1NQRih2MiBhbmQgdjMpL0lTSVMuDQo+IA0KPiBTZWN0aW9uIDMuMyDi gJMgUGxlYXNlIHVzZSBjb25zaXN0ZW50IGNhc2VzIGZvciBhbGwgYWNyb255bXMuDQo+IA0KPiBH TVBMUzogR2VuZXJhbGl6ZWQgTXVsdGktUHJvdG9jb2wgTGFiZWwgU3dpdGNoaW5nDQo+ICAgIElT SVM6ICBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgU3lzdGVtIHRvIEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBTeXN0ZW0NCj4gICAgTFNB OiAgIExpbmsgc3RhdGUgYWR2ZXJ0aXNlbWVudCDvg6AgTGluayBTdGF0ZSBBZHZlcnRpc2VtZW50 DQo+ICAgIExTUDogICBMYWJlbCBTd2l0Y2hpbmcgUGF0aA0KPiAgICBMU1I6ICAgTGFiZWwgU3dp dGNoaW5nIFJvdXRlcg0KPiAgICBNSUI6ICAgTWFuYWdlbWVudCBJbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBCYXNlDQo+ ICAgIE9TUEY6ICBPcGVuIFNob3J0ZXN0IFBhdGggRmlyc3QNCj4gICAgUFNDOiAgIFBhY2tldCBz d2l0Y2ggY2FwYWJsZSAtPiBQYWNrZXQgU3dpdGNoIENhcGFibGUNCj4gICAgU1JMRzogIFNoYXJl ZCByaXNrIGxpbmsgZ3JvdXAgLT4gU2hhcmVkIFJpc2sgTGluayBHcm91cA0KPiAgICBURTogICAg VHJhZmZpYyBFbmdpbmVlcmluZw0KPiAgICBURUQ6ICAgVHJhZmZpYyBFbmdpbmVlcmluZyBEYXRh YmFzZQ0KPiAgICBURE06ICAgVGltZSBEaXZpc2lvbiBNdWx0aXBsZXhpbmcNCj4gDQo+IFNlY3Rp b24gNS4zIOKAkyBTdHlsZSBvZiBjb25zaXN0ZW5jeSB3aXRoIFNlY3Rpb24gNS4yDQo+IA0KPiBT IC8gQWxzbywgdGhpcyBpcyB1dGlsaXplZCBpbmRlcGVuZGVudGx5IGJlY2F1c2Ugb25lIG9yIG1v cmUgbG9jYWwgaW50ZXJmYWNlDQo+IElQIGFkZHJlc3Mgc3ViIFRMVnMgbWF5IGV4aXN0IGluIHRo ZSBzYW1lIExpbmstVExWLg0KPiAvIFRoaXMgaXMgaW5kZXBlbmRlbnRseSBkZWZpbmVkLCBiZWNh dXNlIHRoZSBJbnRlcmZhY2UgSVAgQWRkcmVzcyBzdWItVExWDQo+IG1heQ0KPiAgICBhcHBlYXIg bW9yZSB0aGFuIG9uY2Ugd2l0aGluIHRoZSBzYW1lIExpbmstVExWLg0KPiANCj4gU2VjdGlvbiA1 LjQgYW5kIDUuNSAtLS0gc2FtZSBjb21tZW50IGFzIGFib3ZlDQo+IA0KPiBTZWN0aW9uIDcNCj4g DQo+IC0JTm90IGNsZWFyIHdoYXQgdGhlc2UgTUlCIERlZmluaXRpb25zIGFyZSBhbGwgYWJvdXQu IElmIHRoZXNlIG5lZWQNCj4gdG8gYmUgc3VwcG9ydGVkLCB0aGVyZSBzaG91bGQgc3RhdGVtZW50 cyB0aGF0IHRoZXNlIGFyZSBhZGRpdGlvbmFsIE1JQlMNCj4gdG8gYmUgYWRkZWQgdG8gZXhpc3Rp bmcgTUlCLCBldGMuDQo+IA0KPiBTdHlsZSBvZiB3cml0aW5nIGluIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgc2Vu dGVuY2UNCj4gDQo+IFMgLyBUaGVzZSBhcmUgdGhlIHRhYmxlcyBhbmQgb2JqZWN0cyBhbmQgdGhl aXINCj4gICAgc2Vuc2l0aXZpdHkvdnVsbmVyYWJpbGl0eTogdGVkVGFibGUsIHRlZExvY2FsSWZB ZGRyVGFibGUsDQo+ICAgIHRlZFJlbW90ZUlmQWRkclRhYmxlLCB0ZWRTd0NhcFRhYmxlIGFuZCB0 ZWRTcmxnVGFibGUgY29udGFpbiB0b3BvbG9neQ0KPiAgICBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBmb3IgdGhlIE1Q TFMvR01QTFMgbmV0d29yay4NCj4gLyBUaGUgbGlzdCBvZiB0YWJsZXMgYW5kIG9iamVjdHMgdGhh dCBtYXkgYmUgdnVsbmVyYWJsZSBvciBzZW5zaXRpdmU6DQo+IHRlZFRhYmxlLCB0ZWRMb2NhbElm QWRkclRhYmxlLCB0ZWRSZW1vdGVJZkFkZHJUYWJsZSwgdGVkU3dDYXBUYWJsZSBhbmQNCj4gdGVk U3JsZ1RhYmxlLiBUaGV5IGNvbnRhaW4gdG9wb2xvZ3kgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gZm9yIHRoZSBNUExT L0dNUExTIG5ldHdvcmsuDQo+IA0KPiBTZWN0aW9uIDkuMSAtLS0gTm90IGNsZWFyIHdoYXQgaXMg YmVpbmcgYXNrZWQgdG8gdGhlIElBTkEuIFdvdWxkIGl0IGJlIG1vcmUNCj4gc3BlY2lmaWMgdGhh biDigJx0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gWFhY4oCdPyBOZWVkIGNvbWUgY2xhcmlmaWNhdGlvbiBvbiB0aGlz Lg0KPiANCj4gVGhlIElBTkEgaXMgcmVxdWVzdGVkIHRvIGFzc2lnbiB7dHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uIFhY WCB9IHRvIHRoZSBURUQtTUlCDQo+ICAgIG1vZHVsZSBzcGVjaWZpZWQgaW4gdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVu dC4NCj4gDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gTml0czoNCj4gDQo+IFBsZWFzZSBjb3JyZWN0IHRoZSBmb2xsb3dp bmcgaXNzdWVzIGdlbmVyYXRlZCBieSB0aGUgTml0cyB0b29sOg0KPiANCj4gICA9PSBUaGUgZG9j dW1lbnQgc2VlbXMgdG8gbGFjayBhIGRpc2NsYWltZXIgZm9yIHByZS1SRkM1Mzc4IHdvcmssIGJ1 dCB3YXMNCj4gICAgICBmaXJzdCBzdWJtaXR0ZWQgYmVmb3JlIDEwIE5vdmVtYmVyIDIwMDguICBT aG91bGQgeW91IGFkZCB0aGUNCj4gZGlzY2xhaW1lcj8NCj4gICAgICAoU2VlIHRoZSBMZWdhbCBQ cm92aXNpb25zIGRvY3VtZW50IGF0DQo+ICAgICAgaHR0cDovL3RydXN0ZWUuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbGlj ZW5zZS1pbmZvIGZvciBtb3JlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLikuDQo+IA0KPiAgIC0tIFRoZSBkb2N1bWVu dCBkYXRlIChPY3RvYmVyIDQsIDIwMTIpIGlzIDE0IGRheXMgaW4gdGhlIHBhc3QuICBJcyB0aGlz DQo+ICAgICAgaW50ZW50aW9uYWw/DQo+IA0KPiANCj4gICBDaGVja2luZyByZWZlcmVuY2VzIGZv ciBpbnRlbmRlZCBzdGF0dXM6IFByb3Bvc2VkIFN0YW5kYXJkDQo+IA0KPiAtLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t DQo+IC0tLS0tLQ0KPiANCj4gICAgICAoU2VlIFJGQ3MgMzk2NyBhbmQgNDg5NyBmb3IgaW5mb3Jt YXRpb24gYWJvdXQgdXNpbmcgbm9ybWF0aXZlDQo+IHJlZmVyZW5jZXMNCj4gICAgICB0byBsb3dl ci1tYXR1cml0eSBkb2N1bWVudHMgaW4gUkZDcykNCj4gDQo+ICAgPT0gVW51c2VkIFJlZmVyZW5j ZTogJ1JGQzIzMjgnIGlzIGRlZmluZWQgb24gbGluZSAxNTUyLCBidXQgbm8gZXhwbGljaXQNCj4g ICAgICByZWZlcmVuY2Ugd2FzIGZvdW5kIGluIHRoZSB0ZXh0DQo+IA0KPiAgID09IFVudXNlZCBS ZWZlcmVuY2U6ICdSRkM0MDAxJyBpcyBkZWZpbmVkIG9uIGxpbmUgMTU2NiwgYnV0IG5vIGV4cGxp Y2l0DQo+ICAgICAgcmVmZXJlbmNlIHdhcyBmb3VuZCBpbiB0aGUgdGV4dA0KPiANCj4gICA9PSBV bnVzZWQgUmVmZXJlbmNlOiAnUkZDNDgwMScgaXMgZGVmaW5lZCBvbiBsaW5lIDE1NzksIGJ1dCBu byBleHBsaWNpdA0KPiAgICAgIHJlZmVyZW5jZSB3YXMgZm91bmQgaW4gdGhlIHRleHQNCj4gDQo+ ICAgPT0gVW51c2VkIFJlZmVyZW5jZTogJ1JGQzUzNDAnIGlzIGRlZmluZWQgb24gbGluZSAxNTg3 LCBidXQgbm8gZXhwbGljaXQNCj4gICAgICByZWZlcmVuY2Ugd2FzIGZvdW5kIGluIHRoZSB0ZXh0 DQo+IA0KPiAgID09IFVudXNlZCBSZWZlcmVuY2U6ICdSRkM2MzQwJyBpcyBkZWZpbmVkIG9uIGxp bmUgMTU5MywgYnV0IG5vIGV4cGxpY2l0DQo+ICAgICAgcmVmZXJlbmNlIHdhcyBmb3VuZCBpbiB0 aGUgdGV4dA0KPiANCj4gICA9PSBVbnVzZWQgUmVmZXJlbmNlOiAnSVNPMTA1ODknIGlzIGRlZmlu ZWQgb24gbGluZSAxNTk2LCBidXQgbm8gZXhwbGljaXQNCj4gICAgICByZWZlcmVuY2Ugd2FzIGZv dW5kIGluIHRoZSB0ZXh0DQo+IA0KPiAgID09IFVudXNlZCBSZWZlcmVuY2U6ICdSRkM0MjIwJyBp cyBkZWZpbmVkIG9uIGxpbmUgMTYyNSwgYnV0IG5vIGV4cGxpY2l0DQo+ICAgICAgcmVmZXJlbmNl IHdhcyBmb3VuZCBpbiB0aGUgdGV4dA0KPiANCj4gICAtLSBQb3NzaWJsZSBkb3ducmVmOiBOb24t UkZDICg/KSBub3JtYXRpdmUgcmVmZXJlbmNlOiByZWYuICdJU08xMDU4OScNCj4gDQo+IA0KPiBZ b3VuZw0KDQoNCg== From ma-miyazawa@kddilabs.jp Thu Nov 8 17:07:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DE9421F8B5F; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 17:07:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H+moH6TDA3k7; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 17:07:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp (mandala.kddilabs.jp [IPv6:2001:200:601:12::16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 539F121F8B5A; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 17:07:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E38417481CA; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 10:07:47 +0900 (JST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kddilabs.jp Received: from mandala.kddilabs.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mandala.kddilabs.jp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IU2ECOi3TRHE; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 10:07:46 +0900 (JST) Received: from mail.cn.kddilabs.jp (yellow.lan.kddilabs.jp [172.19.98.10]) by mandala.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id A77801748043; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 10:07:46 +0900 (JST) Received: from miyazawaVAIO (dhcp50.wlan.kddilabs.jp [172.19.110.50]) by mail.cn.kddilabs.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 940BB1E0002; Fri, 9 Nov 2012 10:07:46 +0900 (JST) From: "Masanori Miyazawa" To: "'Leeyoung'" , References: <507F1CC1.7070301@riw.us> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729089755@dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com> <007301cdbd4e$e1876ce0$a49646a0$@kddilabs.jp> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E17290A89DF@dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E17290A89DF@dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com> Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 10:07:42 +0900 Message-ID: <008d01cdbe16$9efe8250$dcfb86f0$@kddilabs.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQIyibe83YGRiYVfUNFFTETwj1TyEwEMD8ZHAb3TimkBuV2iz5by/oxQ Content-Language: ja X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 10:41:19 -0800 Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, 'CCAMP' , draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib.all@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 01:07:52 -0000 Hi Young, Thank you for your response. We will modify the document based on comments including your other = comments, and post it. Regards, Masanori > -----Original Message----- > From: Leeyoung [mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com] > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 3:30 AM > To: Masanori Miyazawa; rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org > Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib.all@tools.ietf.org; > rtg-dir@ietf.org; 'CCAMP' > Subject: RE: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt >=20 > Dear Masanori, >=20 > If the new IANA TED-MIB assignment cannot be known a priori before the > submission, I am fine with the current statement. >=20 > Thanks. > Young >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Masanori Miyazawa [mailto:ma-miyazawa@kddilabs.jp] > Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 7:18 PM > To: Leeyoung; rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org > Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib.all@tools.ietf.org; > rtg-dir@ietf.org; 'CCAMP' > Subject: RE: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt >=20 > Dear Young, >=20 > Thank you for your comments. We modified the document based on your = comments. > Regarding IANA consideration section in your comments, we think that = this > was typo, this should read "yyy". > Is it right? > However, we believe that IANA will know what is expected for this = action > since it mirrors the actions they have applied for many other MIB = modules. >=20 > >Section 9.1 --- Not clear what is being asked to the IANA. Would it = be > more specific than =E2=80=9Ctransmission XXX=E2=80=9D? Need come = clarification >on this. > >The IANA is requested to assign {transmission XXX } to the TED-MIB > > module specified in this document. >=20 > Regards, > Masanori >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Leeyoung [mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com] > > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 2:22 AM > > To: rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org > > Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib.all@tools.ietf.org; > > rtg-dir@ietf.org; CCAMP > > Subject: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt > > > > Hello, > > > > I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this = draft. > > The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or = routing-related > > drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review. The > > purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. = For > > more information about the Routing Directorate, please see > > http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/routing.html > > Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing = ADs, > > it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other > > IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them > > through discussion or by updating the draft. > > > > Document: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-14.txt > > Reviewer: Young Lee > > Review Date: 17 October 2012 > > IETF LC End Date: 18 October 2012 > > Intended Status: Standard track > > > > Summary: > > I have no major concerns about this document that I think should be > > resolved before publication. > > > > Comments: > > This document is clearly written, but hard to read due to tight > > indentations and no spacing between major sections and paragraphs > > throughout the whole document. > > > > Major Issues: > > No major issues found. > > > > Minor Issues: > > > > Abstract > > > > Indentations need to be fixed > > > > Section 2 Introduction > > > > S/ On the other side, MPLS/GMPLS based traffic > > engineering has so far extended OSPF/ISIS routing protocol with = TE > > functionality [RFC4202], [RFC3630], [RFC5329], [RFC5307], = [RFC5305]. > > / On the other side, MPLS/GMPLS based traffic > > engineering has so far extended OSPF/ISIS routing protocol with = TE > > functionality per [RFC4202], [RFC3630], [RFC5329], [RFC5307] and > > [RFC5305]. > > > > Section 2 > > > > S/ To manage such MPLS-TE/GMPLS networks effectively, routing > > information associated with MPLS/GMPLS TE parameters (TED) is > > preferred for the network management, however, there is no clear > > definition of MPLS/GMPLS TE information in existing MIBs related = to > > OSPF(v2 and v3)/ISIS. > > / To manage such MPLS-TE/GMPLS networks effectively, routing > > information associated with MPLS/GMPLS TE parameters (TED) is > > preferred for the network management; however, there is no clear > > definition of MPLS/GMPLS TE information in existing MIBs related = to > > OSPF(v2 and v3)/ISIS. > > > > Section 3.3 =E2=80=93 Please use consistent cases for all acronyms. > > > > GMPLS: Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching > > ISIS: Intermediate System to Intermediate System > > LSA: Link state advertisement =C3=A0 Link State Advertisement > > LSP: Label Switching Path > > LSR: Label Switching Router > > MIB: Management Information Base > > OSPF: Open Shortest Path First > > PSC: Packet switch capable -> Packet Switch Capable > > SRLG: Shared risk link group -> Shared Risk Link Group > > TE: Traffic Engineering > > TED: Traffic Engineering Database > > TDM: Time Division Multiplexing > > > > Section 5.3 =E2=80=93 Style of consistency with Section 5.2 > > > > S / Also, this is utilized independently because one or more local > > interface IP address sub TLVs may exist in the same Link-TLV. > > / This is independently defined, because the Interface IP Address > > sub-TLV may > > appear more than once within the same Link-TLV. > > > > Section 5.4 and 5.5 --- same comment as above > > > > Section 7 > > > > - Not clear what these MIB Definitions are all about. If these need > > to be supported, there should statements that these are additional > > MIBS to be added to existing MIB, etc. > > > > Style of writing in the following sentence > > > > S / These are the tables and objects and their > > sensitivity/vulnerability: tedTable, tedLocalIfAddrTable, > > tedRemoteIfAddrTable, tedSwCapTable and tedSrlgTable contain > topology > > information for the MPLS/GMPLS network. > > / The list of tables and objects that may be vulnerable or = sensitive: > > tedTable, tedLocalIfAddrTable, tedRemoteIfAddrTable, tedSwCapTable = and > > tedSrlgTable. They contain topology information for the MPLS/GMPLS > network. > > > > Section 9.1 --- Not clear what is being asked to the IANA. Would it = be > > more specific than =E2=80=9Ctransmission XXX=E2=80=9D? Need come = clarification on this. > > > > The IANA is requested to assign {transmission XXX } to the TED-MIB > > module specified in this document. > > > > > > > > Nits: > > > > Please correct the following issues generated by the Nits tool: > > > > =3D=3D The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 = work, but > was > > first submitted before 10 November 2008. Should you add the > > disclaimer? > > (See the Legal Provisions document at > > http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.). > > > > -- The document date (October 4, 2012) is 14 days in the past. Is = this > > intentional? > > > > > > Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ------ > > > > (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative > > references > > to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) > > > > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC2328' is defined on line 1552, but no = explicit > > reference was found in the text > > > > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC4001' is defined on line 1566, but no = explicit > > reference was found in the text > > > > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC4801' is defined on line 1579, but no = explicit > > reference was found in the text > > > > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC5340' is defined on line 1587, but no = explicit > > reference was found in the text > > > > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC6340' is defined on line 1593, but no = explicit > > reference was found in the text > > > > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'ISO10589' is defined on line 1596, but = no explicit > > reference was found in the text > > > > =3D=3D Unused Reference: 'RFC4220' is defined on line 1625, but no = explicit > > reference was found in the text > > > > -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. = 'ISO10589' > > > > > > Young >=20 From matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com Wed Nov 21 08:13:03 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1CD421F8738; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 08:13:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -107.791 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.542, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C-1WVc3g9hW7; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 08:12:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from smail3.alcatel.fr (smail3.alcatel.fr [62.23.212.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73F3B21F8734; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 08:12:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.61]) by smail3.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id qALGBf8v001463 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:12:52 +0100 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSA3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.36]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.61]) with mapi; Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:12:34 +0100 From: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" To: "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 17:12:32 +0100 Thread-Topic: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt Thread-Index: Ac3IAwOdkACY3aqXSf2L6pK5iiiXTQ== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.5.121010 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.69 on 155.132.188.83 Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 16:13:03 -0000 Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/routing.html Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt Reviewer: Matthew Bocci Review Date: 21st November 2012 IETF LC End Date: 9th November 2012 Intended Status: Standards Track Summary: This document is basically ready for publication, but has a few minor issues that should be considered prior to publication. Comments: Generally I found this to be a very well written and readable draft. There are a few minor issues that I have listed below, mainly relating to the use of terminology. Major Issues: No major issues found. Minor Issues: Title: The title of the draft is "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for IPv6 Pseudowire FECs". This might be confusing as it suggests that there are special PW FECs for IPv6. In fact, PW FECs are agnostic to the underlying IP version. Therefore, I suggest changing this to something like "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for Pseudowire FECs Advertised over IPv6". Abstract, 1st paragraph: The abstract (and only the abstract) refers to PW LSPs, but this is not common terminology in existing RFCs. It is true that each direction of an MPLS PW is comprised of a unidirectional LSP, but it might be better to try to align more closely with common terminology and call them the LSPs used for each direction of an MPLS PW. Abstract, 2nd paragraph: The draft refers to an IPv6 PW. However, this term could be confused with the colloquial term for an IP Layer 2 transport PW, which is a specific PW type that can carry IPv4 or IPv6. I suggest replacing this term with 'a PW that is setup and maintained using an IPv6 LDP session.' Likewise, the short version of the draft title in the draft headers could be clarified to something like 'PW LSP Ping for IPv6'. Introduction: there are a few places where the text refers to a 'target LDP session'. It isn't clear if this means the src/dst of the LDP session that an LSP ping echo request message is targeting (hence target is ok) or if it really means the 'targeted LDP session', which is what this type of LDP session is normally referred as. Please clarify. Figure 1 and Figure 2 titles. These are not new FEC types for IPv4 and IPv6, but rather new target FEC stack sub-TLVs. I would help readability to modify the titles accordingly. From cpignata@cisco.com Sat Nov 24 08:20:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EB0F21F84DA; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 08:20:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.46 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SC9DjPnFX2d8; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 08:20:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83A8D21F84D6; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 08:20:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4407; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1353774016; x=1354983616; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=dgwWcd6tn88O6n7NF6OQKUXgAAuHBW3U9qUvMF/4XH0=; b=dU0B+unAUBfWEQOp5fNpeK/99uYcxeGWOSUeZ+xyN7P+7Rp9WXGNfvW/ +wEf+jILzIbOOfqzcZjTy6O0nnykPpy/+mSdNG2CMKOKNU5hWzsjNc+dz e0qNF9Mo7skvEJ4iF6pqOScD52kSqnMqykS4HEjyiJnzdXIZntDAvwIQj 0=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EALfysFCtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABEwD0Wc4IeAQEBAwE6PwULAgEIFA4UEDIlAQEEDgUIAYd+Bgy+L4w3g2BhA6ZFgm+CHQ X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6905"; a="145744081" Received: from rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com ([173.37.113.188]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Nov 2012 16:20:15 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com [173.36.12.82]) by rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAOGKFop007784 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sat, 24 Nov 2012 16:20:15 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.5.88]) by xhc-aln-x08.cisco.com ([173.36.12.82]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 10:20:15 -0600 From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" To: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt Thread-Index: Ac3IAwOdkACY3aqXSf2L6pK5iiiXTQCjtxUA Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2012 16:20:15 +0000 Message-ID: <95067C434CE250468B77282634C96ED321B12CF2@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.117.115.52] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <20829B28839472448A20F57EFD395D0A@cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping@tools.ietf.org" , "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2012 16:20:19 -0000 Hi Matthew, Many thanks for your review! Please find some follow-ups inline. On Nov 21, 2012, at 11:12 AM, "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" wrote: > Hello, >=20 > I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. > The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related > drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes > on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to > the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, > please see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/routing.html >=20 > Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it > would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Las= t > Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through > discussion or by updating the draft. >=20 > Document: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt > Reviewer: Matthew Bocci > Review Date: 21st November 2012 > IETF LC End Date: 9th November 2012 > Intended Status: Standards Track >=20 > Summary: >=20 > This document is basically ready for publication, but has a few minor > issues that should be considered prior to publication. >=20 > Comments: >=20 > Generally I found this to be a very well written and readable draft. Ther= e > are a few minor issues that I have listed below, mainly relating to the > use of terminology. >=20 > Major Issues: >=20 > No major issues found. >=20 > Minor Issues: >=20 > Title: The title of the draft is "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for IPv6 > Pseudowire FECs". This might be confusing as it suggests that there are > special PW FECs for IPv6. In fact, PW FECs are agnostic to the underlying > IP version. Therefore, I suggest changing this to something like "Label > Switched Path (LSP) Ping for Pseudowire FECs Advertised over IPv6". This is a really good comment -- I agree completely. Essentially, we are defining LSP Ping Target FEC Stack sub-TLVs for IPv6 LD= P, which include the LDP PW FECs and the PE addresses -- only the latter be= ing of course IP version dependent. I like the updated title suggestion. We should also update the short_title = from "IPv6 PW LSP Ping", suggesting "LSP Ping for PWs over IPv6" -- but ope= n to further suggestions. >=20 > Abstract, 1st paragraph: The abstract (and only the abstract) refers to P= W > LSPs, but this is not common terminology in existing RFCs. It is true tha= t > each direction of an MPLS PW is comprised of a unidirectional LSP, but it > might be better to try to align more closely with common terminology and > call them the LSPs used for each direction of an MPLS PW. Sure. >=20 > Abstract, 2nd paragraph: The draft refers to an IPv6 PW. However, this > term could be confused with the colloquial term for an IP Layer 2 > transport PW, which is a specific PW type that can carry IPv4 or IPv6. I > suggest replacing this term with 'a PW that is setup and maintained using > an IPv6 LDP session.' Likewise, the short version of the draft title in > the draft headers could be clarified to something like 'PW LSP Ping for > IPv6'. Ack on both. Agreed. >=20 > Introduction: there are a few places where the text refers to a 'target > LDP session'. It isn't clear if this means the src/dst of the LDP session > that an LSP ping echo request message is targeting (hence target is ok) o= r > if it really means the 'targeted LDP session', which is what this type of > LDP session is normally referred as. Please clarify. There is a little bit of potential ambiguity, yes, although frankly it coul= d be either. For the case though that there are two PEs back-to-back and we= 'd have a link instead of targeted LDP adjacency, I prefer to only refer to= "target" and to clear the ambiguity we can just remove "target" and leave = "LDP Session" (which is what RFC 4447 uses). >=20 > Figure 1 and Figure 2 titles. These are not new FEC types for IPv4 and > IPv6, but rather new target FEC stack sub-TLVs. I would help readability > to modify the titles accordingly. >=20 Yes, but this is not only in the Figure titles. We could replace all occurr= ences of 'IPv4 "FEC 128" Pseudowire' with say '"FEC 128" Pseudowire - IPv4'= or similar. Thoughts? Thanks, -- Carlos. >=20 >=20 From matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com Mon Nov 26 05:53:49 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F14921F8594; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 05:53:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2OOmOoQadu7I; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 05:53:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C5BB21F858E; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 05:53:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.64]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id qAQDplxg000557 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 26 Nov 2012 14:53:44 +0100 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSA3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.36]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.64]) with mapi; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 14:53:27 +0100 From: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" To: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 14:53:24 +0100 Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt Thread-Index: Ac3L3Wiw/bYttEU8THmU+vPCG6ecRw== Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <95067C434CE250468B77282634C96ED321B12CF2@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.5.121010 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.69 on 155.132.188.80 Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping@tools.ietf.org" , "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 13:53:49 -0000 Hi Carlos, On 24/11/2012 16:20, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" wrote: >Hi Matthew, > >Many thanks for your review! Please find some follow-ups inline. > >On Nov 21, 2012, at 11:12 AM, "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" > wrote: > >> Hello, >>=20 >> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. >> The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related >> drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and >>sometimes >> on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance >>to >> the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, >> please see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/routing.html >>=20 >> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it >> would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF >>Last >> Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through >> discussion or by updating the draft. >>=20 >> Document: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt >> Reviewer: Matthew Bocci >> Review Date: 21st November 2012 >> IETF LC End Date: 9th November 2012 >> Intended Status: Standards Track >>=20 >> Summary: >>=20 >> This document is basically ready for publication, but has a few minor >> issues that should be considered prior to publication. >>=20 >> Comments: >>=20 >> Generally I found this to be a very well written and readable draft. >>There >> are a few minor issues that I have listed below, mainly relating to the >> use of terminology. >>=20 >> Major Issues: >>=20 >> No major issues found. >>=20 >> Minor Issues: >>=20 >> Title: The title of the draft is "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for >>IPv6 >> Pseudowire FECs". This might be confusing as it suggests that there are >> special PW FECs for IPv6. In fact, PW FECs are agnostic to the >>underlying >> IP version. Therefore, I suggest changing this to something like "Label >> Switched Path (LSP) Ping for Pseudowire FECs Advertised over IPv6". > >This is a really good comment -- I agree completely. > >Essentially, we are defining LSP Ping Target FEC Stack sub-TLVs for IPv6 >LDP, which include the LDP PW FECs and the PE addresses -- only the >latter being of course IP version dependent. > >I like the updated title suggestion. We should also update the >short_title from "IPv6 PW LSP Ping", suggesting "LSP Ping for PWs over >IPv6" -- but open to further suggestions. > >>=20 >> Abstract, 1st paragraph: The abstract (and only the abstract) refers to >>PW >> LSPs, but this is not common terminology in existing RFCs. It is true >>that >> each direction of an MPLS PW is comprised of a unidirectional LSP, but >>it >> might be better to try to align more closely with common terminology and >> call them the LSPs used for each direction of an MPLS PW. > >Sure. > >>=20 >> Abstract, 2nd paragraph: The draft refers to an IPv6 PW. However, this >> term could be confused with the colloquial term for an IP Layer 2 >> transport PW, which is a specific PW type that can carry IPv4 or IPv6. I >> suggest replacing this term with 'a PW that is setup and maintained >>using >> an IPv6 LDP session.' Likewise, the short version of the draft title in >> the draft headers could be clarified to something like 'PW LSP Ping for >> IPv6'. > >Ack on both. Agreed. > >>=20 >> Introduction: there are a few places where the text refers to a 'target >> LDP session'. It isn't clear if this means the src/dst of the LDP >>session >> that an LSP ping echo request message is targeting (hence target is ok) >>or >> if it really means the 'targeted LDP session', which is what this type >>of >> LDP session is normally referred as. Please clarify. > >There is a little bit of potential ambiguity, yes, although frankly it >could be either. For the case though that there are two PEs back-to-back >and we'd have a link instead of targeted LDP adjacency, I prefer to only >refer to "target" and to clear the ambiguity we can just remove "target" >and leave "LDP Session" (which is what RFC 4447 uses). Fine with me. > >>=20 >> Figure 1 and Figure 2 titles. These are not new FEC types for IPv4 and >> IPv6, but rather new target FEC stack sub-TLVs. I would help readability >> to modify the titles accordingly. >>=20 > >Yes, but this is not only in the Figure titles. We could replace all >occurrences of 'IPv4 "FEC 128" Pseudowire' with say '"FEC 128" Pseudowire >- IPv4' or similar. Agreed. I think that should include the names used in the IANA registries. Regards Matthew > >Thoughts? > >Thanks, > >-- Carlos. > >>=20 >>=20 > From cpignata@cisco.com Mon Nov 26 06:53:13 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71C321F851B; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 06:53:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2-J0MSOAVCJ9; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 06:53:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA34B21F850B; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 06:53:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5211; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1353941593; x=1355151193; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=qCox6XvY80aZH1GWkQmpPIAyrE8ihOdwsO3/nZgEsPQ=; b=XSPuUa3RnDFatSw317ko3G37OVraAa2/+kSLzJ9zyv1n0Ym1rqCJuqij fc54m3aoOwMBZmz6/g2P5LhUxJdVnRMGyUiBdrLLq19QdqIn9YTsIX6xE 8fV9wULI3nvfYoniQpvs+Lowq48VJYCyo8bFXzc4TN/d0nyyqAkUHNtMG 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAECBs1CtJXHA/2dsb2JhbABEwCIWc4IeAQEBAwE6PwULAgEIFAQKFBAyJQEBBA4FCAGHfgYMv0yMN4NgYQOmRYJvgh0 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6907"; a="146208677" Received: from rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com ([173.37.113.192]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 26 Nov 2012 14:53:12 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com [173.37.183.82]) by rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAQErCMi013468 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 26 Nov 2012 14:53:12 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.5.109]) by xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com ([173.37.183.82]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 08:53:11 -0600 From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" To: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt Thread-Index: Ac3IAwOdkACY3aqXSf2L6pK5iiiXTQCjtxUAAF90agAAAhY1gA== Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 14:53:10 +0000 Message-ID: <95067C434CE250468B77282634C96ED32272E964@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.150.53.42] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "rtg-dir@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping@tools.ietf.org" , "rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 14:53:14 -0000 Hi Matthew, Ack -- thanks again for the review. -- Carlos. On Nov 26, 2012, at 8:53 AM, "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" wrote: > Hi Carlos, >=20 > On 24/11/2012 16:20, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" > wrote: >=20 >> Hi Matthew, >>=20 >> Many thanks for your review! Please find some follow-ups inline. >>=20 >> On Nov 21, 2012, at 11:12 AM, "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" >> wrote: >>=20 >>> Hello, >>>=20 >>> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft= . >>> The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related >>> drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and >>> sometimes >>> on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance >>> to >>> the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, >>> please see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/routing.html >>>=20 >>> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, i= t >>> would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF >>> Last >>> Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through >>> discussion or by updating the draft. >>>=20 >>> Document: draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping-03.txt >>> Reviewer: Matthew Bocci >>> Review Date: 21st November 2012 >>> IETF LC End Date: 9th November 2012 >>> Intended Status: Standards Track >>>=20 >>> Summary: >>>=20 >>> This document is basically ready for publication, but has a few minor >>> issues that should be considered prior to publication. >>>=20 >>> Comments: >>>=20 >>> Generally I found this to be a very well written and readable draft. >>> There >>> are a few minor issues that I have listed below, mainly relating to the >>> use of terminology. >>>=20 >>> Major Issues: >>>=20 >>> No major issues found. >>>=20 >>> Minor Issues: >>>=20 >>> Title: The title of the draft is "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for >>> IPv6 >>> Pseudowire FECs". This might be confusing as it suggests that there are >>> special PW FECs for IPv6. In fact, PW FECs are agnostic to the >>> underlying >>> IP version. Therefore, I suggest changing this to something like "Label >>> Switched Path (LSP) Ping for Pseudowire FECs Advertised over IPv6". >>=20 >> This is a really good comment -- I agree completely. >>=20 >> Essentially, we are defining LSP Ping Target FEC Stack sub-TLVs for IPv6 >> LDP, which include the LDP PW FECs and the PE addresses -- only the >> latter being of course IP version dependent. >>=20 >> I like the updated title suggestion. We should also update the >> short_title from "IPv6 PW LSP Ping", suggesting "LSP Ping for PWs over >> IPv6" -- but open to further suggestions. >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Abstract, 1st paragraph: The abstract (and only the abstract) refers to >>> PW >>> LSPs, but this is not common terminology in existing RFCs. It is true >>> that >>> each direction of an MPLS PW is comprised of a unidirectional LSP, but >>> it >>> might be better to try to align more closely with common terminology an= d >>> call them the LSPs used for each direction of an MPLS PW. >>=20 >> Sure. >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Abstract, 2nd paragraph: The draft refers to an IPv6 PW. However, this >>> term could be confused with the colloquial term for an IP Layer 2 >>> transport PW, which is a specific PW type that can carry IPv4 or IPv6. = I >>> suggest replacing this term with 'a PW that is setup and maintained >>> using >>> an IPv6 LDP session.' Likewise, the short version of the draft title in >>> the draft headers could be clarified to something like 'PW LSP Ping for >>> IPv6'. >>=20 >> Ack on both. Agreed. >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Introduction: there are a few places where the text refers to a 'target >>> LDP session'. It isn't clear if this means the src/dst of the LDP >>> session >>> that an LSP ping echo request message is targeting (hence target is ok) >>> or >>> if it really means the 'targeted LDP session', which is what this type >>> of >>> LDP session is normally referred as. Please clarify. >>=20 >> There is a little bit of potential ambiguity, yes, although frankly it >> could be either. For the case though that there are two PEs back-to-back >> and we'd have a link instead of targeted LDP adjacency, I prefer to only >> refer to "target" and to clear the ambiguity we can just remove "target" >> and leave "LDP Session" (which is what RFC 4447 uses). >=20 > Fine with me. >=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Figure 1 and Figure 2 titles. These are not new FEC types for IPv4 and >>> IPv6, but rather new target FEC stack sub-TLVs. I would help readabilit= y >>> to modify the titles accordingly. >>>=20 >>=20 >> Yes, but this is not only in the Figure titles. We could replace all >> occurrences of 'IPv4 "FEC 128" Pseudowire' with say '"FEC 128" Pseudowir= e >> - IPv4' or similar. >=20 > Agreed. I think that should include the names used in the IANA registries= . >=20 > Regards >=20 > Matthew >=20 >>=20 >> Thoughts? >>=20 >> Thanks, >>=20 >> -- Carlos. >>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20