Re: [Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-09.txt

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Hi Glen,
> On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 16:46 +0200, Benoit Claise wrote:
>> Dear all, Glen,
>>
>> Please find below the AD review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-09.txt
>>
>> The document is in a good enough shape to be sent to IETF LC.
>> Please consider my comments together with the other IETF LC comments.
>>
>> Glen, let me know if you plan on submitting a quick revision soon, or 
>> if I should send THIS version to the IETF LC (which might lead to 
>> redundant comment)
>>
>>
>> - Some idnits
>> http://tools.ietf.org/idnits?url=http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dime-rfc4005bis-09.txt 
>>
>> Miscellaneous warnings:
>>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>    == The document seems to use 'NOT RECOMMENDED' as an RFC 2119 keyword, but
>>       does not include the phrase in its RFC 2119 key words list.
>>
>> Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
>>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>    == Missing Reference: 'BASE' is mentioned on line 219, but not defined
>>
>> I understand that this is a quote from RFC4005. To avoid the source 
>> of confusion, here is a proposal
>
> Rereading this, I don't know what confusion you mean.  It seems to be 
> fine English, pretty clear, and it doesn't seem like the change you 
> suggest is likely to unconfuse ID-nits.  What am I missing?
This proposal will not unconfuse ID-nits, but would make clear to the 
reader that this is a quote, and nobody would look for the [BASE] 
reference ... as this is quote from a different document.
Anyway, minor point. Change it in a next version if you believe that's 
an improvement.
>
>>
>> OLD:
>> However, the presence of an
>>        instance of the Acct-Application-Id AVP was required in RFC 4005,
>>        as well:
>>
>>           The ACR message [BASE] is sent by the NAS to report its session
>>           information to a target server downstream.
>>
>>           Either of Acct-Application-Id or Vendor-Specific-Application-Id
>>           AVPs MUST be present.  If the Vendor-Specific-Application-Id
>>           grouped AVP is present, it must have an Acct-Application-Id
>>           inside.
>> NEW:
>> However, the presence of an
>>        instance of the Acct-Application-Id AVP was required in RFC 4005,
>>        which quotes:
>>
>>           "The ACR message [BASE] is sent by the NAS to report its session
>>           information to a target server downstream.
>>
>>           Either of Acct-Application-Id or Vendor-Specific-Application-Id
>>           AVPs MUST be present.  If the Vendor-Specific-Application-Id
>>           grouped AVP is present, it must have an Acct-Application-Id
>>           inside."
>>
>> - I could not find the meaning of * in, for example,
>>
>>                            [ CHAP-Auth ]
>>                            [ CHAP-Challenge ]
>>                          * [ Framed-Compression ]
>>                            [ Framed-Interface-Id ]
>>                            [ Framed-IP-Address ]
>>                          * [ Framed-IPv6-Prefix ]
>>                            [ Framed-IP-Netmask ]
>>                            [ Framed-MTU ]
>>                            [ Framed-Protocol ]
>>                            [ ARAP-Password ]
>>                            [ ARAP-Security ]
>>                          * [ ARAP-Security-Data ]
>>                          * [ Login-IP-Host ]
>>                          * [ Login-IPv6-Host ]
>>                            [ Login-LAT-Group ]
>>                            [ Login-LAT-Node ]
>>                            [ Login-LAT-Port ]
>>                            [ Login-LAT-Service ]
>>                          * [ Tunneling ]
>>                          * [ Proxy-Info ]
>>                          * [ Route-Record ]
>>                          * [ AVP ]
>>
I believe that you have forgotten to include your proposed text:

    Note that the message formats in the following sub-sections use the
    standard Diameter Command Code Format ([I-D.ietf-dime-rfc3588bis],
    Section 3.2).

Regards, Benoit.