Document: draft-ietf-tewg-interas-mpls-te-req-08.txt Revieiwer: Mary Barnes Date: 18 august 2004 Assignment: ----------- o draft-ietf-tewg-interas-mpls-te-req-08.txt MPLS Inter-AS Traffic Engineering requirements (Informational) - 4 of 6 Note: NOTE WELL: revision 08 should arrive on August 12.. That is the one to be reviewed/approved.. . Participant in PROTO Team pilot:. Workgroup Chair Followup of AD Evaluation Comments. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-proto-ad-comments-pilot-00.txt Token: Bert Wijnen REVIEWER: Mary Barnes (mary.barnes@nortelnetworks.com) Summary: -------- The draft should be ready for publication as Informational with the corrections noted below and perhaps some WG discussion (or chair feedback at a minimum) on the comments identified below. I did find the document difficult to read, but it could be entirely because I am neither an MPLS nor traffic engineering expert. However, I have made some suggestions for rewording for the areas that I found most difficult to read. Given that it's a requirements document and has been approved by the WG, I don't think any substantive editing effort beyond that is particularly worthwhile. Comments: --------- 1. Given that this document also contains a substantive section on application scenarios, it might be worthwhile to consider a change in name to: "MPLS Inter-AS Traffic Engineering Requirements and Scenarios".Ê In which case, I would also suggest changing the second sentence in the abstract from: "Its main objective is to present a set of requirements which would result in general guidelines for the definition, selection and specification development for any technical solution(s) meeting these requirements." to: "Its main objective is to present a set of requirements and scenarios which would result in general guidelines for the definition, selection and specification development for any technical solution(s) meeting these requirements and supporting the scenarios." At a minimum, the abstract should include at least a mention of the document also containing scenarios. 2. Page 8, section 3.3, 1st paragraph. Is this really supposed to be dealing with "QoS guarantees"? Shouldn't this just be "bandwidth guarantees"(per the general Objectives and Requirements in 3.2)? 3. Page 12, section 4.2.1, 2nd paragraph, last sentence. There's another reference to "QOS services", but it seems that this should also be "bandwidth guarantees". Or, this document needs to define what they mean by QOS services. 4. Page 13, section 4.2.1, 7th paragraph, another "QoS" reference. Propose to change "QoS requirement" to "bandwidth requirements". Nits: ----- 1. Page 1. Status of this memo.Ê Needs updating to the new template, per the new guidelines. 2. Page 3, section 1, 1st sentence, the abbreviation for Service Providers "(SPs)" should be added here as the term "SP" is used in a subsequent paragraph. 3. Page 5, section 3.1, definition of Intra-AS TE, correct the extra whitespace between "an" and "AS". 4. Page 5, section 3.1, definition of Inter-AS TE.Ê Suggest to add the following to this definition to clarify that this term is used specifically to refer to IP/MPLS networks for the scope of this document (as clarified later in the document in section 3.3): "Since this document only addresses IP/MPLS networks, any reference to Inter-AS TE in this document refers only to IP/MPLS networks and is not intended to address IP-only TE requirements." 5. Page 7, section 3.2.2, 4th paragraph, 2nd sentence. For readability (and per Webster's), change "Un-deterministic" to "Nondeterministic" and "un-coordinated" to "uncoordinated". 6. Page 9, section 4.1.1, 4th paragraph, last sentence. For readability, change: "beyond the scope of this document and will therefore not be discussed here" to: "beyond the scope of this document and are not discussed further." 7. Starting on Page 9, 5th paragraph, there are funky characters due to using the wrong format for the single quote spread throughout the remainder of sections in 4.1. (e.g. SP1®s). 8. Page 12, section 4.2.1, 4th paragraph, 1st sentence. Change "Continent" to "continent". 9. Page 12, section 4.2.1, 5th paragraph, 1st paragraph.Ê For readability, remove "(not partially)" OR add ", rather than partially" to the end of that sentence. 10. Page 16, section 5.1.6, 1st sentence. Change "pair" to "pairs".Ê 11. Page 16, section 5.1.6, 1st paragraph, last sentence. Add a "SHOULD" prior to "interoperate" in the last sentence to highlight this 2nd requirement (provided SHOULD is the appropriate strength for that requirement). 12. Page 17, setion 5.1.7, 1st paragraph, last sentence. Ditto comment 10. 13. Page 19, section 5.1.13. Remove "on" from the phrase "SHOULD NOT impact on existing". 14. Page 25, section 11. Copyright date should be 2004.