[Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-drmp-03

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

I just have one question I'd like to ask the wg about before
I start IETF LC.

You don't say if priorities are intended to be modified after
they have been set. In the security considerations you do say
that this could be done maliciously, and you do say that
priorities need to be dropped if received from a source not
trusted for that, but you never say if it's considered ok or
not for e.g. an agent to change a priority for some local
policy reason. Don't you need to say that somewhere? (And
apologies if you do say it somewhere and I missed it:-)

There are some nits below, you can handled these before or
after IETF LC, whichever is best.

Cheers,
S.


- Section 5: URL and MME aren't expanded. Since you're just
using it as an example, I'd say expanding this will help any
reader who's not a 3gpp afficionado.

- Section 8, "The priority marking scheme SHOULD NOT require
the Diameter Agents to understand application specific AVPs."
Isn't that a bogus use of 2119 language since we're not
expressing requirements here? s/SHOULD NOT/does not/ would
seem better.

- Section 8, People will ask "why default to 10?" I recall the
WG discussed this but iirc mostly didn't care too much but it
might be nice to justify 10 if there's a way to do it that
doesn't amount to "just because" :-)

- Section 8, The "When setting and using..." paragraphs are
quite verbose. It'd be no harm to make that shorter, e.g. by
just saying: "For all integers x,y in [0,15] treat PRIORITY_<x>
as lower priority than PRIOIRTY_<y> when y<x" You could do
something similar in 9.1.

I-D nits:

  == Unused Reference: 'RFC5226'
  == Unused Reference: 'RFC4412'