Subject: [bess] Document shepherd review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oam-req-frmwk-03

From: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 10:52:49 +0000

Authors

I am the document shepherd for this draft. I have reviewed the draft and have the following comments. In general, the draft is clear and well written – thank you!. Please treat these comments as you would any other working group last call comment.

Best regards

Matthew

Section 2.3 EVPN Network OAM

[…]
  - the MP2P tunnels used for the transport of unicast traffic between
     PEs. EVPN allows for three different models of unicast label
     assignment: label per EVI, label per <ESI, Ethernet Tag> and label
     per MAC address. In all three models, the label is bound to an EVPN
     Unicast FEC.

   EVPN Network OAM MUST provide mechanisms to check the operation of
   the data plane and verify that operation against the control plane
   view.

MB> The formatting here breaks the list up and makes it a bit hard to parse. Maybe you intend this paragraph to be attached to the list bullet above? If so then it would be clearer to merge the paragraphs or indent it to be aligned with the list bullet text.

EVPN network OAM mechanisms MUST provide in-band management

   capabilities. As such, OAM messages MUST be encoded so that they

   exhibit identical entropy characteristics to data traffic.

MB> I think it would be clearer to refer to in-band monitoring rather than management to prevent confusion with the DCN of RFC5718. It is the monitoring that is in-band. I would also suggest adding a clarification with the second sentence in this paragraph along the lines of “… in order that they share the same fate.”

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 14:11:36 -0400

Hi Matthew,

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 6:52 AM Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> Authors
>
> I am the document shepherd for this draft. I have reviewed the draft
> and have the following comments. In general, the draft is clear and
> well written – thank you!. Please treat these comments as you would
> any other working group last call comment.
>
> Best regards
> Matthew
>
>
> MB> The formatting here breaks the list up and makes it a bit hard
> to parse. Maybe you intend this paragraph to be attached to the list
> bullet above? If so then it would be clearer to merge the paragraphs
> or indent it to be aligned with the list bullet text.

I believe that paragraph should be attached to the list bullet above by
appending it to the bullet paragraph. (See, for example, the end of
the immediately following bullet paragraph.)

> MB> I think it would be clearer to refer to in-band monitoring
> rather than management to prevent confusion with the DCN of
> RFC5718. It is the monitoring that is in-band. I would also suggest
> adding a clarification with the second sentence in this paragraph
> along the lines of “… in order that they share the same fate.”

OK. That would change this paragraph to read

   EVPN network OAM mechanisms MUST provide in-band monitoring
   capabilities. As such, OAM messages MUST be encoded so that they
   exhibit identical entropy characteristics to data traffic in order
   that they share the same fate.

One additional change: In line with the first change above, I believe
that the following paragraph should be merged with the preceding
bullet item:

   EVPN Network OAM MUST provide mechanisms to check the operation of
   the data plane and verify that operation against the control plane
   view for the DF filtering function.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 33896 USA
 [email-masked]

---

From: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 09:26:53 +0000

Hi Donald

Thank you. These changes look good to me.

Best regards,

Matthew

On 07/07/2020, 19:11, "Donald Eastlake" <[email-masked]> wrote:

    Hi Matthew,

    Thanks,
    Donald