Skip to main content

Telechat Review of draft-ietf-detnet-ip-over-tsn-06
review-ietf-detnet-ip-over-tsn-06-iotdir-telechat-widell-2021-02-15-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-detnet-ip-over-tsn
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Telechat Review
Team Internet of Things Directorate (iotdir)
Deadline 2021-02-15
Requested 2021-02-08
Requested by Éric Vyncke
Authors Balazs Varga , János Farkas , Andrew G. Malis , Stewart Bryant
I-D last updated 2021-02-15
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -05 by Russ White (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -05 by Dan Romascanu (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -05 by Paul Kyzivat (diff)
Intdir Telechat review of -05 by Tim Chown (diff)
Iotdir Telechat review of -06 by Niklas Widell (diff)
Comments
Sorry for the short-term request (but this document has been placed very recently on the IESG telechat) but it is about 10 pages long. I would appreciate a review from the IoT perspective.

Thank you

-éric
Assignment Reviewer Niklas Widell
State Completed
Request Telechat review on draft-ietf-detnet-ip-over-tsn by Internet of Things Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iot-directorate/HF3hH9xjLoB-2to0mZDAM7QmvuA
Reviewed revision 06 (document currently at 07)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2021-02-15
review-ietf-detnet-ip-over-tsn-06-iotdir-telechat-widell-2021-02-15-00
I have reviewed  draft-ietf-detnet-ip-over-tsn from IoT point of view, as part
of IoT directorate document reviews.

The document specifies the DetNet IP data plane when operating on a TSN
sub-network, and builds on RFC8939 and RFC8565 to do so.

The document is well-written and appears to be Ready (with some minor nits).

I did not identify any IoT related issues with the document.

Nits:

-  RFC8939 reference does not render as link in section 1, first paragraph, but
works in the second paragraph. In section 3 again no link.

- Section 1, third paragraph: This sentence is strange: "As described in
[RFC8939] no DetNet specific headers are added to support DetNet IP flows, only
the forwarding sub-layer functions are supported inside the DetNet domain."

- section 2.2. Abbreviations DF and PREOF not used in rest of document.

- general, mix of using L2 and Layer-2

- general, there are some long, complex to parse, sentences that could perhaps
be split or rephrased into something clearer. E.g. 4.2, third paragraph, "In
cases of TSN-unaware IP DetNet nodes the TSN relay nodes within the TSN
sub-network must modify the Ethernet encapsulation of the DetNet IP flow (e.g.,
MAC translation, VLAN-ID setting, Sequence number addition, etc.) to allow
proper TSN specific handling inside the sub-network."

- general, IEEE specs are referred to as "IEEE 802.1CB [IEEE8021CB]", which
makes the many references to clauses long to read. Can't you just say e.g.,
"Clause 6.6 of [IEEE8021CB]" instead of ""Clause 6.6 of IEEE8021CB
[IEEE8021CB]", except for maybe the first reference?