Re: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-pktc-kerb-tckt-01.txt

[Paul Duffy <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Thomas...inline please...

At 12:41 PM 4/22/2003 -0400, Thomas Narten wrote:
>I've gone ahead and asked for the IETF LC to start for this document.
>
>A few small comments:
>
> >        Code   Len      TCM
> >       +-----+-----+-----+-----+
> >       | TBD |  2  | m1  | m2  |
> >       +-----+-----+-----+-----+
>
>It might be better to not have m1/m2, since the text talks about a
>single 16-bit field rather than two smaller fields.

The format is consistent with the formats presented in RFC 3495 (sections 
8.3, 8.4, etc.).  I'm not sure what you are driving at.  Suggestions?

>
> >       The length MUST be 2.  The TCM field is encoded as an unsigned 16
> >       bit quantity per network byte-ordering rules.  Each bit of the TCM
>
>better wording for bit ordering might be:
>
>       The length MUST be 2.  The TCM field is encoded as an unsigned 16
>       bit quantity in network byte order.  Each bit of the TCM

OK...will make that change in next draft.


> >    5.   IANA Considerations
>
>what about future assignments of bit values?

Yes, needs to be added.  How about...

"IANA is requested to maintain a new number space of "CableLabs Client 
Configuration Option Ticket Control Mask Bit Definitions", located in the 
BOOTP-DHCP Parameters Registry.  The initial bit definitions are described 
in section 4 of this document.  IANA is requested to register future bit 
mask definitions via an "IETF Consensus" approval policy as described in 
RFC 2434 [add ref}."


> >       However, the scenario described above is unlikely to occur.
> >       Within the cable delivery architecture required by the various
> >       CableLabs projects, the DHCP client is connected to a network
> >       through a cable modem and the CMTS (head-end). The CMTS is
> >       explicitly configured with a set of DHCP servers to which DHCP
> >       requests are forwarded.  Further, a correctly configured CMTS
> >       will only allow downstream traffic from specific IP
> >       addresses/ranges.
>
>Could be more clear. I don't follow the last sentence, for example.

Last sentence change to...

"Further, the CMTS is explicitly configured to allow downstream traffic 
only from specific IP addresses/ranges."

OK ?

P.S.  Should I hold the next draft until after IESG LC ?


>Thomas
>_______________________________________________
>dhcwg mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

--

Paul Duffy
Cisco Systems, Inc.
[e-mail]