Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04

kkinnear <kkinnear@cisco.com> Mon, 27 February 2017 21:50 UTC

Return-Path: <kkinnear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E60D41293FC; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 13:50:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uZC7rrv1G8hd; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 13:50:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-3.cisco.com (alln-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.142.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B9761293DC; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 13:50:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1981; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1488232240; x=1489441840; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=XKoc5J3lZu+Z/5giu6fqu5Teev+Ub5lSNxvDYVpuPnY=; b=dW7QrvGYsB/gJaGX8YLfb41l40srPYORCYfFamfiq11sK2hteno0EaIf PzgMOAPDl48T0Qh5CyqXa3m7YFhnwqqAJBgabSu+lOVyCOmzsjhIuxQ+N TpX1L/RywlFJ6ZkZo8gOY6w3YdDc2VEU9HsoemuG1XghnHcMW0pigyatA k=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,215,1484006400"; d="scan'208";a="390465047"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by alln-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Feb 2017 21:50:39 +0000
Received: from dhcp-161-44-67-126.cisco.com (dhcp-161-44-67-126.cisco.com [161.44.67.126]) (authenticated bits=0) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v1RLocXl000362 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 27 Feb 2017 21:50:39 GMT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: kkinnear <kkinnear@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <74FB30F1-234A-4D1C-BF3C-ED4DAA4C3F4E@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:50:38 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F7A22599-C0B2-4981-B777-DB077DB1E3A8@cisco.com>
References: <148599922705.18700.14648245113952484559.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2BD6519B-F6AC-4630-8666-13D3ED54054C@cisco.com> <8f0ee693-8fd9-0202-209d-09b503f2231b@cs.tcd.ie> <74FB30F1-234A-4D1C-BF3C-ED4DAA4C3F4E@cisco.com>
To: dhc-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol@ietf.org, "<dhcwg@ietf.org>" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, Bernie Volz <volz@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
X-Authenticated-User: kkinnear@cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/oZU6yyDSOJxF4qXw5kpMvtCQ1Sk>
Cc: Kim Kinnear <kkinnear@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 21:50:42 -0000

I have submitted a new version of the DHCPv6 Failover Protocol:

 draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-06

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol/>

which reflects the final changes resulting from the IESG and
directorate reviews to date.  All of these changes are to explain
things more clearly or explicitly.  None of them alter the intended
operation of the protocol.

The first two changes resulted from a COMMENT by Mirja Kuhlewind.

* Expanded the first occurrence of the use of MAX_UNACKED_BNDUPD
  in Section 6.1.1 "Sending a CONNECT message", from the current:

>   o  OPTION_F_MAX_UNACKED_BNDUPD containing the maximum number of BNDUPD
>      messages that this server is prepared to accept over the failover
>      connection without causing the connection to block.

  to the following:

  o  OPTION_F_MAX_UNACKED_BNDUPD containing the maximum number of BNDUPD
     messages that this server is prepared to accept over the failover
     connection without causing the connection to block.  This is to
     implement application level flow control over the connection, so
     that a flood of BNDUPD messages does not cause the connection to block
     and thereby prevent other messages from being transmitted 
     over the connection and received by the failover partner.

* Changed the second place where OPTION_F_MAX_UNACKED_BNDUPD
  is transmitted in Section 6.1.2 "Receiving a CONNECT message", where
  it discusses creating a CONNECTREPLY message, to say the same thing
  as above (as it currently has the same "current" text).

* Fixed several typographical errors observed while making the above
  changes (OPTION_F_MAX_UNACKED_BNDUPD was referenced as
  OPTION_F_UNACKED_BNDUPD).

* Added a missing "a" in recently added paragraph in Security
  Considerations section.

Regards -- Kim