Subject: [trill] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis-04: (with COMMENT)

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 16:23:08 -0800

Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I had trouble parsing "output it to or queue it for" (this occurs twice
in the sentence).

   However, it does not output it to or queue it for that link,
   although, if appropriate (for example, the frame is multi-
   destination), it may output it to or queue it for other links.

I don't think the text is incorrect, just awkward. Perhaps commas would
help?

In these three subsection titles, 

   3.2.1 Change Optimization One

   3.2.2 Change Optimization Two

   3.2.3 Settling Detection Optimization

I found the title for 3.2.3 helpful, but not 3.2.1 or 3.2.2. Is it
possible to come up with more descriptive titles?

I found 

   For robustness, a TRILL switch sends a number of copies of a Port-
   Shutdown messages configurable from one to three, which defaults to
   two copies, at a configurable interval, which defaults to 20
   milliseconds (see Section 6.6).

difficult to parse. Perhaps

   For robustness, a TRILL switch sends a configurable number of copies
   of Port-Shutdown messages separated by a configurable interval. The
default
   number of copies is two, although this can be configured as one copy
   or as three copies, and the default interval is 20 milliseconds 
   (see Section 6.6).

?

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 09:21:57 -0500

Hi Spencer,

Thanks for the comments. See below

> draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis-04: No Objection

It's kind of verbose but I believe that actual output port
implementations typically provide for directly streaming out a packet
even as other parts of the packet are still arriving at the switch,
particularly in cut-through routing, or just sticking it in a queue
for output later if the port is busy. Do you have any suggestion for
better wording?

> possible to come up with more descriptive titles?

That's a reasonable point. Maybe

   3.2.1 Optimization for Change to Lower Priority

   3.2.2 Optimization for Change to Priority Only

>    or as three copies, and the default interval is 20 milliseconds

Sure, that seems like an improvement. Might also be good to say "time
interval" instead of just "interval".

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [email-masked]

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:42:43 -0600

Hi, Donald,

> for output later if the port is busy. Do you have any suggestion for

I was thinking that

    However, it does not output it to, or queue it for, that link,
    although, if appropriate (for example, the frame is multi-
   destination), it may output it to, or queue it for, other links.

might be clearer.

If the RFC Editor removes the commas, of course, you can slap me in Chicago
;-)

Spencer

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 15:05:16 -0500

Hi Spencer,

>    destination), it may output it to, or queue it for, other links.

OK. That looks good to me.

Thanks,
Donald