Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-12

Hi Robert, thank you for your the most detailed review and helpful comments. I'll prepare -13 version based on your suggestions. Please find my responses, notes in-lined and tagged GIM>> Regards, Greg On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 7:48 AM, Robert Sparks wrote: > Reviewer: Robert Sparks > Review resul

Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-12

ent. I suspect it would be > easiest to simply say "referred to as using a one-step clock" and "referred > to as using a two-step clock" or similar. > > RjS > > On 1/18/17 12:03 PM, Greg Mirsky wrote: > > Hi Robert, > Sasha Vainshtein came with elega

Re: [Gen-art] [mpls] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-12

nks, > Acee > > From: mpls on behalf of Greg Mirsky < > gregimir...@gmail.com> > Date: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 at 1:25 PM > To: Robert Sparks > Cc: "m...@ietf.org" , "gen-art@ietf.org" , > "draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time@ietf.org"

Re: [Gen-art] [mpls] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-12

r we should or > should not define the IGP extensions. > > > > Could you respond more directly to this point? > > > >Les > > > > > > *From:* Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, January 19, 2017 7:44 AM > *To:* Acee Lindem (a

Re: [Gen-art] [mpls] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-12

:ginsb...@cisco.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, January 19, 2017 4:55 PM > > *To:* John E Drake ; Acee Lindem (acee) < > a...@cisco.com>; Alexander Vainshtein ; > Greg Mirsky > *Cc:* Robert Sparks ; m...@ietf.org; > gen-art@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time@ietf.org

Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-13

Hi Robert, thank you for your review and patience as we've been working on the document. The text you've proposed is indeed useful to implementer and I'll add it with the next update. Regards, Greg On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: > Reviewer: Robert Sparks > Review result:

Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-13

Hi Robert, Section 5 Data Plane Theory of Operation has the following recommendation on reading time value at ingress and egress: Each RTM-capable node on the explicit path receives an RTM packet and records the time at which it receives that packet at its ingress interface as well as

Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-13

ble at the same point of packet processing striving to avoid introduction of jitter in propogation delay to ensure precise accuracy in time determination. Regards, Greg On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Robert Sparks wrote: > > > On 2/14/17 10:06 PM, Greg Mirsky wrote: > &g

Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-13

ysical layer as possible at the same point of packet processing striving to avoid introducing the appearance of jitter in propogation delay whereas it should be accounted as residence time. Regards, Greg On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Robert Sparks wrote: > > > On 2/15/17 11:

Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-13

he sentence at "These actions" > > RjS > > On 2/15/17 9:40 PM, Greg Mirsky wrote: > > Hi Robert, > safe travel and here's another version for your consideration. The point > I'm trying to convey is that the jitter is real but must be accounted not >

Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-03

Hi Joel, thank you for your thorough review and the most helpful comments. I've did s/proposal/specification/ through the document. As for the section 2.1 would the following text be clearer: The rules of setting timestamp flags in Modes field in server greeting and Set-Up-Response messages and

[Gen-art] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-04.txt

new version of I-D, draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-04.txt has been successfully submitted by Greg Mirsky and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format Revision: 04 Title: Support of IEEE-1588 time stamp format in Two-Way Active Measurement

Re: [Gen-art] [Lime] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-09

Hi Qin, et. al, IEEE 1588-2008 in section 5.3.2 defines the TimeInterval type that represents time interval as struct TimeInterval { Integer64 scaledNanoseconds; }; The scaledNanoseconds member is the time interval expressed in units of nanoseconds and multiplied by 2+16. Positive or negative ti

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail-09

Hi Linda, thank you for the review and your kind words, much appreciated. If an end-point during the p2mp BFD session never responded to the head's multicast poll it is unknown to the head and cannot be reported as "inactive tail". I can imagine that if the head has been given the list of the tail

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-active-tail-09

FD seems requires more support of the network, > isn’t it? > > > > Linda > > > > *From:* Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Friday, June 29, 2018 11:45 AM > *To:* Linda Dunbar > *Cc:* gen-art@ietf.org; rtg-...@ietf.org; IETF list ; > draft-i

Re: [Gen-art] [PWE3] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-06

Dear Huub, Nabil, et al., IEEE 802.1ag interprets MEP and MIP as: - Maintenance association End Point - Maintenance domain Intermediate Point Y.1731 interprets them as: - Maintenance entity group (MEG) End Point - MEG Intermediate Point The reference to MD Level implies reference t

Re: [Gen-art] [PWE3] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-06

Dear Nabil, can we avoid different interpretation of the same abbreviation (RDI): RDI Remote Defect Indication for Continuity Check Message RDI Reverse Defect Indication AFAIK, the latter form is the interpretation used by both IEEE 802.1ag and Y.1731. How useful is the first form? Re

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan-07

Hi Erik, thank you for your review, pointed questions, and helpful suggestions. Please find responses in-lined tagged GIM>>. Regards, Greg On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:35 PM Erik Kline via Datatracker wrote: > Reviewer: Erik Kline > Review result: On the Right Track > > I am the assigned Gen-ART r

Re: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan-09

Hi Erik, thank you for your reviews and for sharing thoughts on the selection of the destination IPv6 address. Following recommendations from Adam, I've updated the document to use the proper representation of IPv6 addresses and refer to them as "IPv4-mapped IPv4 loopback addresses". These updates

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv-06

he answer and for addressing my comments. All your > explanations are clear and satisfactory, and the proposed edits are fine > with me. > > Regards, > > Dan > > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 10:22 PM Greg Mirsky wrote: > >> Hi Dan, >> thank you for your

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv-06

mplementor. Regards, Greg On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 3:39 PM Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > Hi again Greg :) > > Reading Dan's review reminded me of one other point (inline)... > > On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 12:22:04PM -0700, Greg Mirsky wrote: > > Hi Dan, > > thank you for yo

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv-06

the > "Uniqueness (soft failure)" characterization of Section 7.1 of the linked > document. > > -Ben > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 09:37:08AM +0300, Dan Romascanu wrote: > > Greg's understanding of my comment is correct. > > > > Regards, > > >

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-option-tlv-06

identifier to different STAMP test sessions. Regards, Greg On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 7:01 PM Greg Mirsky wrote: > > Hi Ben, > thank you for the suggestions. Would the Informational reference to > draft-gont-numeric-ids-generation be reasonable? > > Regards, > Greg > > On M

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-08

Hi Meral, thank you for the review and your kind support of our work on this document. Regards, Greg On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 at 10:00 PM Meral Shirazipour via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-pam-06

Hi Peter, thank you for your thorough review and detailed comments. Please find my notes below under the GIM>> tag. I've attached the diff highlighting all the updates. Regards, Greg On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 5:42 AM Peter Yee via Datatracker wrote: > Reviewer: Peter Yee > Review result: Ready wi

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-pam-06

ks for considering my review comments. My responses to specific points > are found below. > > > > Kind regards, > > -Peter > > > > *From:* Greg Mirsky > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 11, 2023 1:54 AM

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-oam-13

762, DOI 10.17487/RFC8762, March 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8762>. [RFC8972] Mirsky, G., Min, X., Nydell, H., Foote, R., Masputra, A., and E. Ruffini, "Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol Optiona

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-oam-framework-09

Ed., "Data Fields for In Situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM)", RFC 9197, DOI 10.17487/RFC9197, May 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9197>. [RFC9326] Song, H., Gafni, B., Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., and T.

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-oam-framework-09

draft-ietf-detnet-oam-framework Diff: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-detnet-oam-framework-10 Thank you for your help in improving the document. Regards, Greg On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 3:22 PM Greg Mirsky wrote: > Hi Mallory, > thank you for the review and your thoughtf

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-ip-oam-10

Hi Gyan, thank you for your thorough review, thoughtful question, and helpful suggestion. Please find my notes below tagged GIM>>. Best regards, Greg On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 10:31 PM Gyan Mishra via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > Reviewer: Gyan Mishra > Review result: Ready with Nits >

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-detnet-ip-oam-10

s and mechanisms in Deterministic Networking networks that use the IP data plane. Best regards, Greg On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 6:30 AM Greg Mirsky wrote: > Hi Gyan, > thank you for your thorough review, thoughtful question, and helpful > suggestion. Please find my notes below tagged GIM>&g

Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed-27

Hi Linda, Thank you for the review and your kind consideration of this work; much appreciated. Regards, Greg On Thu, Apr 11, 2024, 00:25 Linda Dunbar via Datatracker wrote: > Reviewer: Linda Dunbar > Review result: Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area >

[Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART Early review of draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam-10

Hi Paul, thank you for your thorough review and helpful suggestion. I agree with you and removed the sentence altogether. I uploaded the new version -11 . Regards, Greg On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 9:52 AM Paul Kyzivat wrote: > I am the a

[Gen-art] Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-11

Hi Vijay, thank you for your review and thoughtful suggestion. I've updated the new working version and upload along with the resolutions of all comments received during the IETF LC. Regards, Greg On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 7:26 PM Vijay Gurbani via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > Reviewer: