Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-karp-isis-analysis-04

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Some misunderstanding, I think.

  Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist :
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section.  (See Section
     2.2 of http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case
     when there are no actions for IANA.)

Regards
   Brian

On 30/06/2015 11:53, Uma Chunduri wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
>> However, note that an IANA Considerations section is always required, even if it says that no IANA action is necessary.
> 
> I removed this as per the guidance of Amanda (IANA).  I am not sure it's always required. Amanda, could you please confirm on this?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> --
> Uma C.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[e-mail]] 
> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 4:37 PM
> To: Uma Chunduri; [e-mail]; General Area Review Team
> Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-karp-isis-analysis-04
> 
> That looks fine (in the -06), thanks.
> 
> However, note that an IANA Considerations section is always required, even if it says that no IANA action is necessary.
> 
> Regards
>    Brian Carpenter
> 
> On 30/06/2015 08:38, Uma Chunduri wrote:
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> Thanks for your consideration and for providing the modified text quickly.  That works and it's a great help.
>> Shall update this in the next version.
>> --
>> Uma C.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 1:32 PM
>> To: Uma Chunduri; [e-mail]; General 
>> Area Review Team
>> Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of 
>> draft-ietf-karp-isis-analysis-04
>>
>> Hi Uma,
>>
>> See below...
>> On 30/06/2015 06:19, Uma Chunduri wrote:
>>> Hi Brian,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your review (apologies for the delay from my side). 
>>> Response i-line [Uma]:
>>>
>>> --
>>> Uma C.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 7:37 PM
>>> To: [e-mail]; General Area Review 
>>> Team
>>> Subject: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-karp-isis-analysis-04
>>>
>>> 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-karp-isis-analysis-04.txt
>>> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
>>> Review Date: 2015-06-13
>>> IETF LC End Date: 2015-07-03
>>> IESG Telechat date:
>>>
>>> Summary:  Almost ready
>>> --------
>>>
>>> Minor Issue:
>>> ------------
>>>
>>>> 3.2.  Key Management Protocols
>>>
>>> I don't like the references to expired drafts. These drafts almost have the flavour of normative references, since apparently they described recommended mitigation techniques. If they matter, they should be properly available.
>>> draft-weis-gdoi-mac-tek-03
>>> draft-yeung-g-ikev2-08
>>> draft-hartman-karp-mrkmp-05
>>>
>>> [Uma]:  Sure. But to give a bit context quickly -
>>>
>>> KARP WG started working on group keying protocol based on IKEv2 when I used these references. But, later scope is changed and this aspect didn't go forward as expected. 
>>> So I would remove the references to draft-yeung-g-ikev2-08 and 
>>> draft-hartman-karp-mrkmp-05.  However, though expired, I would like 
>>> to keep the reference for
>>>  draft-weis-gdoi-mac-tek-03 and  associated RFC 6407, so in future it can present a good reference to GDOI in this context.  Hope this is acceptable else I shall remove this too. 
>>
>> Thanks for the answer. I am still a bit concerned that a reader will be slightly confused, though. Can I suggest trying to rephrase the sentence a bit, something like:
>>
>> OLD:
>>    A mechanism,
>>    similar to as described in [I-D.weis-gdoi-mac-tek] can be used to
>>    distribute group keys to a group of ISes in Level-1 area or Level-2
>>    domain, using GDOI as specified in [RFC6407].
>>
>> NEW:
>>    A mechanism is needed to distribute group keys to a group of ISes
>>    in a Level-1 area or Level-2 domain, using the Group Domain of
>>    Interpretation (GDOI) protocol as specified in [RFC6407]. An example
>>    policy and payload format was described in [I-D.weis-gdoi-mac-tek].
>>
>> Regards
>>     Brian
>>