Hello Thomas, Thank you kindly for your email and the explanations.
Yes thank you, this has addressed my concerns. Best Regards, Menachem בתאריך יום ה׳, 27 בפבר׳ 2025 ב-16:40 מאת <thomas.g...@swisscom.com>: > Dear Menachem, > > Thanks a lot for the review and apologies for delayed replied. We are > preparing -15 and addressed your comments here: > > > https://author-tools.ietf.org/diff?doc_1=draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-14&url_2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/network-analytics/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry/refs/heads/main/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-15.txt > > > I believe that the introduction would be clearer if the instructions to > IANA about the new elements were not included in the Introduction section > but left for the IANA section later in the document. I also think that the > measurement interval period should be mentioned in the introduction and > added to the diagram in Figure 1 > > You are refering to figure 1 which compares the IP performance with the > IANA registry. This is done by purpose to describe the relationship between > the two before going to Section 3 and 4 where each are being addressed. > > > In section 3.3.5 it was not clear to me how the T0 and Tf are determined > by each node. Section 7.4 Measurement Interval does not explain what > triggers the start and end of the measurement interval. But maybe I have > missed this. 4. > > T0 and Tf are being determined on the OAM nodes described in the following > section "3.3.6. Roles". I updated Section 7.4 to give more clarity how the > delay is being measured and accounted in flows. > > Please let me know wherever this addresses your comments. > > Best wishes > Thomas > > -----Original Message----- > From: Menachem Dodge via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> > Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2025 8:40 PM > To: ops-...@ietf.org > Cc: draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry....@ietf.org; > last-c...@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: [OPSAWG]Opsdir last call review of > draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-14 > > Reviewer: Menachem Dodge > Review result: Has Nits > > Reviewer: Menachem Dodge > Review result: Has Nits > > I have reviewed this document as part of the Ops area directorate's > ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. > These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Ops area > directors. > Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any > other last-call comments. > > The document defines an additional 4 IPFIX Information Elements in order > to export measured delay of packet flows at transit and decapsulating nodes. > > The document is readable and understandable. > > Nits > ==== > > 1. In the first paragraph of the introduction section the word "need" is > used twice but I believe that it should be "needs" with an 's'. 2. I > believe that the introduction would be clearer if the instructions to IANA > about the new elements were not included in the Introduction section but > left for the IANA section later in the document. I also think that the > measurement interval period should be mentioned in the introduction and > added to the diagram in Figure 1. 3. In section 3.3.5 it was not clear to > me how the T0 and Tf are determined by each node. Section 7.4 Measurement > Interval does not explain what triggers the start and end of the > measurement interval. But maybe I have missed this. 4. Section A.1 the > title: "Aggregated On-Path Dealay Examples" should be "Delay". > > Thank you > > >
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
