Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Mon, 27 January 2014 09:55 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83BE71A0184; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 01:55:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.548
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gskwMuUXJ2KZ; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 01:55:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias244.francetelecom.com [80.12.204.244]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D13381A011C; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 01:55:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omfeda08.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.201]) by omfeda14.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id EF4432AC68D; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:55:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PUEXCH81.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.34]) by omfeda08.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id CE590384078; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:55:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.9]) by PUEXCH81.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.34]) with mapi; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:55:09 +0100
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>, "draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:55:07 +0100
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03
Thread-Index: AQF6/p6mIwEjavahOcoGuw0nlckk9wI8szcDmy6g4DCAAAX/8A==
Message-ID: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F473608DF@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
References: <02db01cf1a6e$62eb8280$28c28780$@gmail.com> <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F4736082C@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <033d01cf1b42$854c10e0$8fe432a0$@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <033d01cf1b42$854c10e0$8fe432a0$@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: fr-FR
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F473608DFPUEXCB1Bnante_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.3.2322014, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2013.11.19.63615
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:55:16 -0000

Re-,
The description is used by the entity managing the PCP server. The document does not elaborate on such usage as this is deployment-specific: e.g.,  (1) it can be used as  helper to clean the mapping table, (2) in some deployments that make use of a portal to instruct pcp mappings, this option can be used to store a subscriber-identifier, etc. We can add some text if you think this is useful to be mentioned in the document.
For the second point, I updated Section 5 with a pointer to Section 2. Thanks.
Cheers,
Med
De : Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv@gmail.com]
Envoyé : lundi 27 janvier 2014 10:31
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org
Cc : ietf@ietf.org; gen-art@ietf.org
Objet : RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03

Hi Med,
Inline
Roni

From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> [mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com]
Sent: 27 January, 2014 10:31 AM
To: Roni Even; draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org<mailto:ietf@ietf.org>; gen-art@ietf.org<mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03

Dear Roni,
Thank you for the review.
Please see inline.
Cheers,
Med
De : Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv@gmail.com]
Envoyé : dimanche 26 janvier 2014 09:13
À : draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org>
Cc : ietf@ietf.org<mailto:ietf@ietf.org>; gen-art@ietf.org<mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
Objet : Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.

Document:  draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date:2014-1-26

IETF LC End Date: 2014-2-4

IESG Telechat date:



Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard track RFC.





Major issues:



Minor issues:



1.       I am not sure what the use of the "description" option is. I can see how to create one but as for usage the only text I can see is "Querying the PCP server to get the description text of an existing mapping is out of scope." I think that the document should provide information about the purpose of this option.

[Med] The main usage is for a user to associate a textual description with a mapping. This is captured by this text "   This option can be used by a user (or an application) to indicate a
   description associated with a given mapping such as "FTP server", "My
   remote access to my CP router", "Camera", "Network attached storage
   serve", etc.

"

[Roni Even] This is motivation but it is not clear why the user does it if no one can see it or does anything with it. It is kept on the server but not used by anyone?


Nits/editorial comments:

 1.  The IANA section should provide enough information to fill the registry http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcp-parameters/pcp-parameters.xml#options
[Med] Required information as per RFC6887 is provided in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03#section-2.
[Roni Even] So section 5 should point to the definition is section 2