Subject: [NSIS] WGLC review of RMD

From: Andrew McDonald <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:17:13 +0100

Hi Attila, Georgios, all,

Having just got back from a post-ietf holiday, I've finished reviewing
the RMD draft. I've marked up comments on a copy of the draft. Since
this is probably too big to post to the list, I've put it here:
http://nsis.srmr.co.uk/~adm/draft-ietf-nsis-rmd-07_adm_comments.txt

There are a couple of general comments (also contained in the marked-up
version):

The internal operation of GIST (e.g. C-mode and D-mode) is referred to a
number of times in the draft. However, these details are not visible to
the NSLP. In general, GIST interactions should probably be dicussed in
terms of the API.

There are a lot of places where something like:
"This must be set to 42 (i.e. Some_Thing)"
is said. It would be better just to say:
"This must be set to Some_Thing"
where the value for Some_Thing is defined once in a table somewhere (in 
many cases that is in the QoS NSLP document)
Otherwise, someone needs to do a careful check through the document to
make sure that these values are all correct in each instance (especially 
required given that changes have happened in the documents where some of 
these codes originate, e.g. QoS NSLP).

In looking at how QSpec stacking is used by RMD, it seems it is used at
the initial reservation when there are parallel end-to-end and
intra-domain RESERVE messages to piggyback intra-domain QSpec
information on to the RESPONSE. Also, it seems that sometimes there is a
RESPONSE sent by the edge node (back to the other edge node) as part of
the intra-domain session. Is it possible to summarise where the 
intra-domain RESPONSE is carried by the end-to-end session, and when a 
RESPONSE (or NOTIFY) is sent as part of the intra-domain session?

regards,
Andrew

_______________________________________________
nsis mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis

---

From: Attila Báder (IJ/ETH) <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 15:25:55 +0200

Hi Andrew, thank you very much for reviewing the draft and for the detailed comments. We try to include them in the next version, and come back with answers, comments later. 

Best regards, Attila

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew McDonald [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 2:17 PM
> To: Attila Báder (IJ/ETH); [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: WGLC review of RMD
> 
>