[Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-capablities-update-05

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[e-mail]>]

Please find below the AD review of
draft-ietf-dime-capablities-update-05. This document is ready for IETF
Last Call, and I will initiate the Last Call soon. Please consider the
comments below together with other comments that may be received during
the IETF LC. The comments are divided into Technical (T) and Editorial
(E). 

T1. While some parts of the specification are aligned with
[I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis] (for example section 5 - Security
Considerations), other refer to 3588 (Section 6 - IANA Considerations).
We need consistency on this respect, and my suggestion is to align the
document with [I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis] as we do have a normative
dependency on it anyway. 

T2. What happens if the receiver of a CUR does not return a
Capabilities-Update-Answer (CUA)? Is there any timeout or retransmission
strategy in place?


E1. I find this sentence at the end of the first paragraph in Section 4
to be imprecise: 

> This message allows the
   update of a peer's capabilities (supported Diameter applications,
   etc.).

What belongs to etc. must be defined clearly. Actually at this point
there is need to define precisely what capabilities are covered by the
message, and if there is a way to extend this list in the future. 

E2. Expand acronyms at first occurrence: AVP, SCTP

Regards,

Dan