Last Call Review of draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname-05
review-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname-05-opsdir-lc-dunbar-2015-09-11-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2015-09-15
Requested 2015-09-01
Authors Hongjun Zhai , Tissa Senevirathne , Radia Perlman , Mingui Zhang , Yizhou Li
I-D last updated 2015-09-11
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -05 by Russ Housley (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Russ Housley (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Carl Wallace (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -05 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -05 by Russ White (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Linda Dunbar
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname by Ops Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 07)
Result Has nits
Completed 2015-09-11
review-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname-05-opsdir-lc-dunbar-2015-09-11-00

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written primarily for the benefit of the operational area
directors.

Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other
last call comments.



This draft is written very clear, but I have a few questions:



-



Mechanism proposed by this draft is to solve the same problem by
“draft-ietf-trill-aa-multi-attach”. Are those two mechanisms equally good? Is
there any pros and cons comparing those two mechanisms (i.e. the Pseudo name
vs. Active-Active
 attachment protocol?

-



The end of the Section 3 has a note on how to reduce the consumption of
nicknames. What if CE1 is connected to RB1/RB2, CE2 is connected to RB2/RB3,
and CE3 is connected to RB1/RB3, do you need total of 3 Pseudo nicknames for
them? Plus
 the original nicknames for RB1, RB2, and RB3, so total of 6 nicknames are
 needed for this configuration, correct?





Linda Dunbar