jiebi/ids-paragraph-commentary-corpus huggingface dataset:
Draft: draft-ietf-detnet-dp-sol-mpls-01

Commentary: cache -00 version . add changes for -01 rev
A Packet Replication Function (PRF) replicates DetNet flow packets
in an edge or a relay node and forwards them to one or more next
hops in the DetNet domain.  The number of packet copies sent to
each next hop is a DetNet Flow specific parameter at the node
doing the replication.
A Packet Order Function (POF) re-orders packets within a DetNet
flow that are received out of order.  This function may be
implemented at an edge or a relay node.
A Packet Replication Function (PRF) replicates DetNet flow packets
and forwards them to one or more next hops in the DetNet domain.
The number of packet copies sent to each next hop is a DetNet flow
specific parameter at the node doing the replication.  PRF can be
implemented by an edge node, a relay node, or an end system.
A Packet Ordering Function (POF) re-orders packets within a DetNet
flow that are received out of order.  This function can be
implemented by an edge node, a relay node, or an end system.
The reader's attention is drawn to RFC8169 which describes a method
of recording the packet queuing time in an MPLS LSR on a packet by
per packet basis and forwarding this information to the egress edge
system.  This allows compensation for any variable packet queuing
delay to be applied at the packet receiver.  The mechanism described
in RFC8169 may have wider application than basic time transfer in a
DetNet.
For example, RFC8169 describes a method of recording the packet
queuing time in an MPLS LSR on a packet by per packet basis and
forwarding this information to the egress edge system.  This allows
compensation for any variable packet queuing delay to be applied at
the packet receiver.  Other mechanisms for IP/MPLS networks are
defined based on IEEE Standard 1588 IEEE1588, such as ITU-T G.8275.1
and G.8275.2.
Draft: draft-ietf-detnet-dp-sol-mpls-00

Commentary: as promised in today 's meeting
DetNet node types are defined in I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture.
DetNet Edge Nodes sit at the boundary of a DetNet domain.  They are
responsible for mapping non-DetNet aware traffic to DetNet services.
They also support the imposition and disposition of the required
DetNet encapsulation.  These are functionally similar to pseudowire
(PW) Terminating Provide Edge (T-PE) equipment.
Relay nodes are strategically placed within a DetNet domain and are
used to enhance the reliability of delivery by enabling the
replication of packets so that multiple copies, possibly over
multiple paths are forwarded through the DetNet domain.  They also
reduce the impact of replication by the eliminating surplus copies of
DetNet packets.  Relay nodes may sit the boundary of an MPLS domain
when the non-MPLS domain is DetNet aware.  Replication and
elimination may also be performed at ingress and egress edge nodes
respectively.  Relay nodes are functionally similar to PW S-PEs or,
when at the edge of an MPLS network, T-PEs.
Edge nodes, and relay nodes are aware of the needs of particular
DetNet flows and take care to process them in accordance with the
required performance needs.
fig_tsn_mpls_detnet shows several node types defined in I-D.ietf-
detnet-architecture.  DetNet Edge Nodes sit at the boundary of a
DetNet domain.  They are responsible for mapping non-DetNet aware
traffic to DetNet services.  They also support the imposition and
disposition of the required DetNet encapsulation.  These are
functionally similar to pseudowire (PW) Terminating Provide Edge
(T-PE) nodes which use MPLS TE LSPs.
fig_ip_mpls_detnet and fig_8021_detnet, show different cases where
relay nodes may be used.  Relay nodes are similar to edge nodes in
that both are aware of the needs of particular DetNet flows and take
care to process them in accordance with the required performance
needs.  They differ in that relay nodes sit within a DetNet domain
while edge nodes always sit at DetNet domain boundaries.  Both node
types can enhance the reliability of delivery by enabling the
replication of packets so that multiple copies, possibly over
multiple paths are forwarded through the DetNet domain.  They also
reduce the impact of replication by eliminating surplus copies of
DetNet packets.  Relay nodes may sit the boundary of an MPLS domain
when the non-MPLS domain is DetNet aware.  Relay nodes are
functionally similar to PW S-PEs or, when at the edge of an MPLS
network, T-PEs.
Draft: draft-ietf-detnet-dp-sol-mpls-00

Commentary: Also pick up simplified makefile from ip draft 
 can you take a look ... 
 I got one specific comment on reordering and relay functions ... comment embedded .
A Packet Reorder Function (PROF) re-orders packets within a DetNet
flow that are received out of order.  This function may be
implemented at an edge node or end system.
A Packet Reorder Function (PROF) re-orders packets within a DetNet
flow that are received out of order.  This function may be
implemented at an edge or relay node.
Draft: draft-ietf-detnet-dp-sol-mpls-00

Commentary: Put the text that was taken out of the payload ident section back in . Fixed some compile warnings Two were figs too large One was use of [ IEEE1588 ] instead of < xref .... Rest were apparently unused references Requesting pull so we are in sync on this . 
 Looks OK to me . Merging all these chnanes .
The only nodes that needs to know the payload type of a flow are the
DetNet ingress node and the DetNet egress nodes.  The ingress node
has to know how to process the packet it receives from the ingress
AC, and egress edge node has to know how to..
The only nodes that needs to know the payload type of a flow are the
DetNet ingress node and the DetNet egress nodes.  The ingress node
has to know how to process the packet it receives from the ingress
AC, and egress edge node has to know how to prepare the packet for
transmission on the egress AC.
On ingress a DetNet edge node has to classify the packets into those
that are for transmission as Detnet packets and those that are for
transmission as "normal" packets at one of more lower priorities.
The packet type is indicated to the egress edge node through the
value of the S-label.  Thus, when the egress edge node looks up the
S-label one of the parameters returned is the packet type which in
turn tells the egress edge node how to prepare the packet for
transmission over the egress AC.
The consequence of this approach is that if multiple packet
encapsulations are processed on a node, each will need its own
S-Label.  That is not generally a problems, since it is anticipated
that only one encapsulation type intented for carriage as a DetNet
flow will be present on any egress.  However, IPv4 and IPv6 have
different forwarding equivalence classes (FEC) in MPLS and are
therefore allocated different labels rather than being distinguished
through the IP version field in the IP header.  Futhermore IPv4 and
IPv6 when running directly over Ethernet are identified via the
Ethertype rather than via the IP version number.  Whilst it ought to
be safe to identify the IP type though the IP version number the
absence this approach in practical applications suggests that it is
more conservative to distinguish between IP types through the
S-Label.  Thus when the payload is IP, two S-Labels are used, one to
identify an IPv4 payload and one to identify an IPv6 payload.
Draft: draft-ietf-detnet-dp-sol-mpls-00

Commentary: I have started to address the comments as agreed on the call 2nd May . Before I do a more significant edit next week I want to test out the pull mechanism , 
    first three commits to the master . 
 I wonder why we need to have / propose two approaches for the aggregation ?
Deterministic Networking (DetNet) is a service that can be offered by
a network to DetNet flows.  DetNet provides these flows extremely low
packet loss rates and assured maximum end-to-end delivery latency.
General background and concepts of DetNet can be found in I-D.ietf-
detnet-architecture.
Deterministic Networking (DetNet) is a service that can be offered by
a network to DetNet flows.  DetNet provides these flows extremely an
low packet loss rates and assured maximum end-to-end delivery
latency.  General background and concepts of DetNet can be found in
I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture.
A control word used for sequencing and identifying duplaicate
packets at the DetNet service layer.
A control word used for sequencing and identifying duplicate
packets at the DetNet service layer.
DetNet service Label (S-label) that identifies a DetNet flow to
the peer node that is to process it.  The S-Label is allocated
from the platform label space.
DetNet service Label (S-label) that identifies a DetNet flow to
the peer node that is to process it.  The S-Label is allocated
from the platform label space RFC3031.
DetNet flow identification at a DetNet service layer is realized by
an S-label.  It maps a Detnet flow to a specific d-CW in a DetNet
node.  For a data flow the S-label used for flow identification MUST
be bottom label of the label stack for a DetNet-s- or DetNet-st-flow
and MUST precede the d-CW.
An S-label for a single DetNet flow does not need to be unique DetNet
domain wide.  As long as two or more different DetNet flows do not
errorneously map to a same d-CW in a DetNet node the labels may vary.
DetNet flow identification at a DetNet service layer is realized by
an S-label.  The S-lable is allocated from the platform label label
space RFC3031 Thich means that the DetNet flow is correctly
identified and matched to the flow parameters, including the flow
history, regardless of which input interface the packet arrives on.
The S-label MUST be at the bottom label of the label stack for a
DetNet-s- or DetNet-st-flow and MUST precede the d-CW.
The S-label for a specific DetNet flow is unique to that DetNet flow
on a specific node, but is not required to be identical with the
S-lable for that DetNet flow in any other node within the DetNet
domain.  Thus the S-label can only be used to identify the DetNet
flow at the intended receiving node.