[Dime] AD review for draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-06

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Tue, 25 January 2011 13:36 UTC

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:39:08 +0100
Message-ID: <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A0402B315B0@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com>
Thread-Topic: AD review for draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-06
Thread-Index: Acu8lT3ibifh6lU0Tpy5/flLeDHB8g==
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: dime@ietf.org
Subject: [Dime] AD review for draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-06
Precedence: list

Please find below the AD review of draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-06. While
the document is well written and in pretty good shape, there are a
number of issues that need to be clarified and editorial nits that need
to be cleaned up before the document can be sent to IETF Last Call. 

The comments below are divided into T (Technical) and E (Editorial). 

T1. Section 4.3 - Please explain what happens with the bindings existing
prior to the reception of the Session Re-Authorization request in case
of a BINDING_FAILEURE. Are these left in place? 

T2. Section 4.6

> The
   DNCA relies on DNCA Manager and DNCA Agent to have builtin redundancy
   support to recover state in case of failure.

It looks like this requirement needs to be expressed in stronger terms,
maybe as a 2119 MUST. 

T3. What does the following mean in section 5.5? 

>  Diameter applications conforming to this specification MUST advertise
   support by including the value of TBD in:

T4. The way [RFC4005] is referenced in section 8.3 implies that a
Normative Reference is required. 

T5. The security requirements in sections 5.1 and 12 seem to be
contradictory. While in section 12 it is stipulated that 

> Securing the
   information exchange between the authorizing entity (the DNCA
   Manager) and the NAT device requires bilateral authentication of the
   involved parties, authorization of the involved parties to perform
   the required procedures and functions, and procedures to ensure
   integrity and confidentiality of the information exchange

In section 5.1 identity verification and authorization of procedures are
only MAY. 



E1. idnits complains about the following: 

tmp/draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-06.txt(1298): Line has weird spacing:
'...ly with    wit...'
tmp/draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-06.txt(1828): Unexpected reference
format: '...ocol,[RFC3588] to r...'

E2. Section 1: 

>     The query functionality complements
       alternative information query mechanisms, such as Simple Network
       Management Protocol (SNMP) based mechanisms, if available.

What does exactly 'complements' mean here? 

E3. Expand LSN or include the abbreviation in the Conventions section

E4. Chose one formulation - either 'The DNCA' or 'DNCA'

E5. Section 3.3 - s/Diameter NAT Control Manager/DNCA Manager/

E6. Write in a consistent manner DNCA Agent (and not DNCA agent as in
section 4.1)

E7. Section 4.2: s/Figure 5 shows the protocol interaction/Figure 5
shows the initial protocol interaction/

E8. Section 4.3 s/perfborm/perform/

E9. RFC 3588 is sometimes mentioned as 3588, other times as [RFC3588] -
the latest seems to be better

 
Thanks and Regards,

Dan

[Dime] AD review for draft-ietf-dime-nat-control-… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Re: [Dime] AD review for draft-ietf-dime-nat-cont… Shwetha