[Autoconf] Review of draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07

["Ulrich Herberg" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

some minor comments on the MANET architecture draft:
----------------------
typos:
----------------------

  -- page 10 (section 4.2.2), paragraph 4: "In MANETs` with SBI...";
remove the genitive apostrophe
  -- page 12 (section 5.1), paragraph 3: "...may be assigned to the
MANET routers' non-MANET interfaces(s)" ; remove first s of interfaces
  -- same paragraph: the prefix p should be either upper-case or
lower-case but not mixed
  -- page 13 (section 5.2), paragraph "unique prefixes": "this
requirements" -- wrong plural; should be "these requirements" or "this
requirement"
  -- same paragraph, "One way to achieve this is /128 ..."; I would
rather say "One way to achieve this is _using_ /128 [...] prefixes"...
as I am not a native English speaker, I am not sure about that :-)
  -- same paragraph, last line: MANETs instead of MANET
  -- page 15 (section 7), paragraph 2: "or two network can share...";
network should be in plural
  -- page 16 (section 8.2), paragraph 2: "to discuss the number of
MANET router to.."; router should be in plural


------------------
other issues
------------------
  -- maybe I would combine section 6 and 7. They seem to belong
together in a certain way
  -- figure 5: maybe I just didn't see it, but I cannot find a
reference to this figure
  -- figure 6: I would definitely add some more explanations to this
figure (which itself is very good) in the paragraph above of it: it
could be explained why a /62 prefix is used in the delegated prefix,
otherwise one could think it's a typo. Also the loopback interface is
not explained in the text. One could maybe also add in the text that
the address of the MANET interface of is not part of a subnet, or
formulated in another way: the MANET is not a subnet. In the second
paragraph of section 5.1, one could relate these nodes with the figure
(to help the reader understand which nodes in the figure are exposed
to the MANET characteristics and which not)
  -- section 8.1. "one or more IP hops - MANET, _site_,...". Is the
site scope defined? Hasn't it been declared deprecated in RFC3879?
  --  same section, last sentence. I do not understand this sentence;
why do you suddenly talk about AS, when you did never before or after
this sentence?

Regards,
Ulrich


_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf