Subject: [ippm] Review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-05

From: Jon Mitchell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 12:01:00 -0700

Reviewer: Jon Mitchell
Review result: Has Nits

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's

ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG.  These 
comments were written with the intent of improving the operational
aspects of the 
IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be
included in AD reviews 
during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat
these comments 
just like any other last call comments. 

Ready with Nits - this draft adds the ability to use PTP timestamps as
an alternative to NTP timestamps for active performance measurement
protocols OWAMP and TWAMP.  Although this draft does a good job of
discussing interoperability for both sides of the session having or
not having support for this operational capability, in several places
it states that if a send/receiver support this capability it must be
set to 1 in the flags.  However, only for TWAMP Light mode, this seems
configurable.  This may just be my interpretation, but it probably
should state that local implementations MAY provide a configurable
knob to not negotiate PTPv2 timestamps in section 2.1 and 2.2 even if
the capability is supported by the implementation.

---

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 12:34:31 -0500

Hi Jon,
thank you for kind consideration of the draft and thoughtful comment.
Indeed, TWAMP Test, and the time stamp format to be used, may be controlled
by means other than TWAMP Control, e.g., local configurable knob exposed
via data model or CLI. I'll work on text updates for the next version.

Regards,
Greg