Subject: [manet] Comments on draft-ietf-manet-credit-window-01

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 10:36:26 -0500

Hi,
	I have a few comments on draft-ietf-manet-credit-window.  The first
issue to me is a blocking issue.

General issues/comments:

1) The metric of the credit windows is not defined.  E.g,. does one
credit represent 1 frame, 1 bit, 1 byte, etc.?  This should be trivial
to fix, e.g., add "in octets" to the Credit field definitions.

2) The security section should be aligned with the approach taken in
dlep (or vice versa), i.e., one uses TLS while the other doesn't

3) The iana section needs to align with DLEP and RFC5226.

Specific comments/issues:

>    1.  Reject the use of credits for this destination, via the
>        Destination Up Response message containing a Status data item
>        with a status code of 'Request Denied'.  (See status codes in
>        [DLEP]), or

Wouldn't it be better to use a new status code to disambiguate the new
reason for the rejection?

> packet at OSI Layer 2.

So you mean the MAC layer, but framing overhead and other encoding
should not be included?  Given the rest of the document and dlep is MAC
aware, why not just say the MAC layer?

Section 7.2:

s/XXXX/Credit Window Out of Sync

Section 8.1:
s/Reserved/Credit Increment

Section 8.2:
Unless the data prate is really low, I'd expect some amount of
differences from the time the message is sent to the time it is
processed is possible. How is this to be handled?  I think this should
be covered.

That's it,
Lou

---

From: Stan Ratliff <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 15:29:21 -0500

Lou,

> to fix, e.g., add "in octets" to the Credit field definitions.

The last sentence of section 2 (Overview) says:

 Credits represent the number of data plane octets, or an increment in
   the number of data plane octets, that can be sent on a given window
   at OSI Layer 2 to the receiver.

That said, I can add the suggested text .

> dlep (or vice versa), i.e., one uses TLS while the other doesn't

Yes. That will be corrected.

> 3) The iana section needs to align with DLEP and RFC5226.

OK

> reason for the rejection?

I really didn't (don't) see a need. The Dest Up is either accepted or
rejected. That said, I'm willing to add an additional status code.

> aware, why not just say the MAC layer?

Whatever it takes to make people happy...

> s/Reserved/Credit Increment

Thanks for those catches.

> processed is possible. How is this to be handled?  I think this should

I'll see if I can craft adequate text.

Regards,
Stan

>
> That's it,
> Lou
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>

---

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 15:33:40 -0500

> That said, I can add the suggested text .
Thanks.

Lou