The MPLS WG Archive

[<benjamin.niven-jenkins@bt.com>]

Colleagues,

After reading draft-leroux-mpls-mp-ldp-reqs-03 I have the following
editorial comments/suggestions:

Section 3.1, Paragraphs 1,2,3,4,5,7 - put a blank line after each
paragraph.

Section 3.1, Paragraph 6 - "A P2MP LSPs is an LSP" => "A P2MP LSP is an
LSP"

Section 3.1, Paragraph 8 - "without the need of traffic engineering" =>
"without the need for traffic engineering"

Section 3.2, Paragraph 1 - you use egress LSR but everywhere else in the
document you use Egress LSR.

Section 3.2, Paragraph 5 - "This may allow reducing the amount of LDP
state to be maintained by a LSR" suggest changing this to "This may
allow a reduction in the amount of LDP state that must be maintained by
a LSR"

Section 5.2, Paragraph 2 - "Such P2MP FEC MUST be distinguished clearly
from the exiting P2P FEC." I think you mean 'existing' not 'exiting'.

Section 5.8, Paragraph 2 - "Given that P2MP LDP routing must rely on the
RIB, the achievement of the following requirements also implies the
underlying routing protocols (IGP, etc.)."  I think what you're trying
to say is something like "Given that P2MP LDP routing must rely on the
RIB, the achievement of the following requirements also implies the
underlying routing protocols (IGP, etc.) must meet these requirements."

Section 5.8.1, Paragraph 2 - "The rerouting time SHOULD be as much as
possible minimized so as to reduce traffic disruption." => "The
rerouting time SHOULD be minimized as much as possible so as to reduce
traffic disruption." 

Section 5.8.2 - "Traffic disruption SHOULD be as much as possible
minimized during such rerouting." => "Traffic disruption SHOULD be
minimized as much as possible during such rerouting." and "Unnecessary
data duplication during such rerouting SHOULD also be as much as
possible minimized." => "Unnecessary data duplication during such
rerouting SHOULD also be minimized as much as possible."

Section 5.8.3 - Same comments as for Section 5.8.2

Section 5.9, Paragraph 1 - "This requires that the same label be
negotiated will all downstream LSRs for the LSP." 'will' => 'with'

Section 5.16 "   A solution SHOULD avoid whatever single points of
failures or propose some technical solutions for a failover mechanism."
remove 'whatever' as it's superfluous?

Section 6.1, Paragrpah 3 "Particularly it is RECOMMENDED that the size
of a MP2MP state on a LSR" remove the superfluous 'a' before MP2MP

Ben


-- 
Ben Niven-Jenkins
Network Architect, BT Exact
  
E-mail: benjamin.niven-jenkins@bt.com 
Office: +44 (0)1473 648225
Mobile: +44 (0)7918 077205
   Fax: +44 (0)1332 578827

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls