[Dime] AD review of draft-ietf-dime-4over6-provisioning-03

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

I've done my AD review of draft-ietf-dime-4over6-provisioning-03

Seems to me like all's well. I'll start IETF LC shortly. My few
nitty comments are below, please treat then as IETF LC comments.

Thanks,
S.

- intro, 3rd last para: You use both MAP-E and MAP
(without a -E) here. Are they the same or is that an
implicit subtlty that'd be better explicit? I'd say
either use MAP-E in both cases, or explain in general
what's meant when you use each.

- intro; The last para is very unclear. What does
"doesn't specify <x> and that the AVPs...." mean? I'd say
split into two sentences.

- section 2, 2nd para: Why "allowed to use"? That's wrong
anyway, a customer could do other things as well as what
one operator provisions for that customer.  S/is
allowed/wants/ would be fine.

- 2.2 and 2.3: Are we only talking source ports for
outgoing traffic here, or is this the list of all ports
on which this customer can receive inbound traffic? Would
it help to say, since the latter can be bigger than the
former? I assume we mean the latter anyway. (This may be
a dumb question - sorry if my ignorance of LW4over6 and
MAP-E is showing there:-)

- 2.5, typo: s/Pv4/IPv4/

- 3.1, I'm surprised there wasn't already an AVP for
that. If there is one, or a similar one, it might be good
to say and give a bit of a hint when to use which.

- 8.1: the softwire I-D references are outdated. Does
everything still work ok with the latest draft versions?