Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL) Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Framework
RFC 7174
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.
(Ted Lemon; former steering group member) Yes
(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) No Objection
I have no objection to the publication of this document. Here are a few Comments that might improve the document. --- Please note that, after some soul-searching, the RFC Editor has "OAM" expanded as "Operations, Administration, and Maintenance" per RFC 6291 that you reference. --- ECMP - Equal Cost Multi-Pathing Isn't this more normally "Equal Cost Multipath"? --- The MPLS working group had a lot of discussion with the ITU-T around terminology for OAM. This resulted in draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone which has been approved for publication as an RFC. You may find it helpful to allign your trminology (such as MEP and MIP) with that document. You might consider that your variations are not significantly different, and I might find it hard to explain how they are different, but the folk from the ITU-T considered precision very important and claimed they were aligning with Y.1731 amongst other documents. --- Of course, Section 1.2 could contain an endless list of prior art. I should have liked it had you referenced RFCs 4377/8 and 5860/6371 just because of the amount of time and effort that went in to them and the consensus between two SDOs that the second pair embody. But I would completely understand if you decided you didn't even want to start to think about this at this stage. --- Figure 1 I think there is an alignment problem with the BFD line. --- Section 3.1 The TRILL OAM packet format proposed below provides s/proposed/defined/
(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) No Objection
(Benoît Claise; former steering group member) No Objection
(Gonzalo Camarillo; former steering group member) No Objection
(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection
Francis Dupont made some editorial comments in his Gen-ART review. And the authors responded. Hopefully there's a new version somewhere or instructions to the RFC Editor so that these comments are not lost. At least the one on the expansion of ECMP term seemed like a fix that should be done, not sure if the others are more RFC Editor style issues.
(Joel Jaeggli; former steering group member) No Objection
(Martin Stiemerling; former steering group member) No Objection
(Richard Barnes; former steering group member) No Objection
(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection
(Spencer Dawkins; former steering group member) No Objection
This was very well-written and clear to me. Thank you for that.
(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection
(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) No Objection
> BFD, which is typically used for fast convergence > BFD provides fast convergence characteristics to TRILL networks. BFD only provides fast failure detection. How convergence happens is up to ISIS. > The recommended default value is the character string "DEFAULT". Presumably you need to identify a character set to send this in.