Document: draft-ietf-nsis-y1541-qosm-08.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2010-01-20
IETF LC End Date: 2010-01-28
IESG Telechat date: 

Summary: Informational draft appears to contain normative material.
--------

Major issues:
-------------

> > 3.1.  Traffic Model (TMOD) Extension Parameter
> >
> >   The traffic model (TMOD) extension parameter is represented by one
> >   floating point number in single-precision IEEE floating point format
> >   and one 32-bit reserved field.
> >
> >      0                   1                   2                   3
> >      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
> >     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> >     |M|E|N|r|           15          |r|r|r|r|          2            |
> >     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> >     |  Peak Bucket Size [Bp] (32-bit IEEE floating point number)    |
> >     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> >     |                            Reserved                           |
> >     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> >
> >                         Figure 1: TMOD Extension

Suddenly we have a protocol element defined in detail, but no explanation
of what protcol it extends. Is this part of a QSPEC, or what? There should
be some explanation and a reference.

Also, this looks like normative material. What's it doing in an Informational
draft? 

Same comment for 3.2.  Restoration Priority Parameter.

I suspect that a full analysis would find other hidden normative statements,
such as

> > 4.6.  Preemption Behaviour
> >
> >   The default QNI behaviour of tearing down a preempted reservation is
> >   followed in the Y.1541 QOSM.  

Not to mention the normative-style IANA Considerations.

This should surely be Experimental or Standards Track, according
to where it stands in the WG plan. 


Minor issues:
-------------

In section 2.1:

   Classes 0 and 1 might be implemented using the DiffServ
   EF PHB, and support interactive real-time applications.  Classes 2,
   3, and 4 might be implemented using the DiffServ AFxy PHB Group, and
   support data transfer applications with various degrees of
   interactivity.  Class 5 generally corresponds to the DiffServ Default
   PHB, 

I would expect references to RFC 3246, 2597 and 2474 in this text.


Editorial:
-------------

The formal title of this draft is ugly:

Y.1541-QOSM -- Y.1541 QoS Model for Networks Using Y.1541 QoS Classes

I suggest reducing it to

Model for Networks Using Y.1541 QoS Classes