Hi Ketan, That solution works for me.
Thanks! -Mallory On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 12:09 Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Mallory, > > Thanks for your review of the document. > > Regarding your comment on the Transposition Scheme, there is no elaborate > text on it in this document as that is orthogonal to the issues with > RFC9252 addressed by this document - i.e., there is no issue with the > transposition scheme as specified in RFC9252. Authors felt it would be > easier to leave that part out and hence that paragraph in the introduction. > That said, you have a point that a reader, who is not familiar, may find > this harder to understand and hence we will add a reference pointer to the > specific section 4 of RFC9252 on the first use of the term Transposition > Scheme. This will reflect in the next document update. > > I hope this helps. > > Thanks, > Ketan > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 10:17 PM Mallory Knodel via Datatracker < > nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > >> Reviewer: Mallory Knodel >> Review result: Ready >> >> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area >> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed >> by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just >> like any other last call comments. >> >> For more information, please see the FAQ at >> >> <https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.ietf.org_en_group_gen_GenArtFAQ&d=DwMFaQ&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=krANNudPSfUTEf2kXiduBUqRjXhDsKNCASr1kibHLfs&m=VaEQx5jB6i77ItUVC7a-5m56viqc1Ebda9FYhkU3VGhwKwru47iSvVuwhWP8JdV-&s=nl3158F7bVoNMnLAjF7oIil3sLJV7sOS0Bpp-DdqL3Q&e=> >> >. > > >> >> Document: draft-ietf-bess-bgp-srv6-args-?? >> Reviewer: Mallory Knodel >> Review Date: 2025-02-21 >> IETF LC End Date: 2025-03-04 >> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat >> >> Summary: This document updates recommendations "for the signaling and >> processing of SRv6 SID advertisements for BGP Service routes associated >> with >> SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors that support arguments" based on lessons learned >> from >> implementations of RFC9252. >> >> Major issues: None. >> >> Minor issues: It would perhaps help readers if in the introduction to the >> document that updates RFC9252, the authors quoted one seemingly critical >> passage, namely the description of the Transposition Scheme: >> >> This later form of encoding is >> referred to as the Transposition Scheme, where the SRv6 SID Structure >> Sub-Sub-TLV describes the sizes of the parts of the SRv6 SID and also >> indicates the offset of the variable part along with its length in >> the SRv6 SID value. The use of the Transposition Scheme is >> RECOMMENDED for the specific service encodings that allow it, as >> described ... >> >> This passage might then be modified in a clearer manner given the goals >> of the >> current document. Or perhaps this belongs in Section 4 on backwards >> compatibility. >> >> Nits/editorial comments: None. Well written and straight forward. >> >> >>
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list -- bess@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to bess-le...@ietf.org
