IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04

kkinnear <kkinnear@cisco.com> Wed, 01 February 2017 22:43 UTC

Return-Path: <kkinnear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60F57129636 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 14:43:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 xDqyk16iDy81 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 14:43:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-3.cisco.com (alln-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.142.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B04F41299DA for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Feb 2017 14:43:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3102; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1485988995; x=1487198595; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=i9zj2hT3wdeIdqV+T7wuClNJlhOxhHV4yJwzflCGYIQ=; b=E0K8c6y1PbKX5SwcylnxYx+utk3nh+num48CJPWttCAg1k57RiBNlCsg /lRYMXySZLwz8kLUTWz3/I3luMO8542lqMLdSIDAryTMN0HNhNNS75dLk LyWvKWb6LHVAg+R+zMZAWeUeiMznwKPhNq56muTGFhggWrjQGK7f0Rz14 8=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,322,1477958400"; d="scan'208";a="379506561"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by alln-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Feb 2017 22:43:15 +0000
Received: from bxb-kkinnear-8814.cisco.com (bxb-kkinnear-8814.cisco.com [10.98.10.245]) (authenticated bits=0) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v11MhD56020368 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Feb 2017 22:43:14 GMT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: kkinnear <kkinnear@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <2D095247-E389-42C9-879E-72370E89C138@piuha.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 17:43:13 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <CE0F8FC1-365D-4D1F-B065-734D92693D11@cisco.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B4BFD8F92@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <2D095247-E389-42C9-879E-72370E89C138@piuha.net>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
X-Authenticated-User: kkinnear@cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/3moitIdWqSwbDAMLUe1SRMT4Ndg>
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol.all@tools.ietf.org>, Kim Kinnear <kkinnear@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 22:43:17 -0000

> On Feb 1, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> wrote:
> 
> Thanks for your review, Christer!
> 
> Authors, can you make a note of the editorials?

	Yes, I have agreed to make all of the changes
	suggested by Christer. 

	Thanks -- Kim
> 
> Jari
> 
> On 01 Feb 2017, at 21:57, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments.
>> 
>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>> 
>> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>> 
>> Document:                                      draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04.txt
>> Reviewer:                                        Christer Holmberg
>> Review Date:                                  01.02.2017
>> IETF LC End Date:                          19.01.2017
>> IESG Telechat date: (if known)    02.02.2017
>> 
>> Summary:                                       The document is almost ready for publication, but there are some editorial nits that I’d like the authors to address.
>> 
>> Major issues:                                 None
>> 
>> Minor issues:                                 None
>> 
>> Nits/editorial comments:
>> 
>> INTRODUCTION:
>> 
>> Q1:        In the first sentence of the Introduction, I suggest to say:
>> 
>> “The failover protocol defined in this document provides…”
>> 
>> Otherwise it’s a little unclear what failover protocol you are talking about.
>> 
>> Q2:        In the Introduction, before the first sentence, shouldn’t there be some background text, including some information about the problem that the document solves. I know there is something in the Abstract, but I think there should also be something in the Introduction, before jumping into the solution.
>> 
>> Q3:        In the Introduction, I suggest adding a reference to the first occurrences of “DHCP service” and “DHCP server”.
>> 
>> Q4:        In the Introduction, you switch between “This protocol” and “The failover protocol”. Please use consistent terminology. This applies to the document in general.
>> 
>> SECTION 4:
>> 
>> Q5:        In the Abstract and Introduction it is said that DHCPv6 does not provide server redundancy. Then section 4 talks about failover concepts and mechanism.
>> 
>> Are those concepts something used for DHCPv6 today, but for some reason do not fulfil the failover protocol requirements?
>> 
>> OR, are these general concepts that will be supported by implementing the failover protocol?
>> 
>> I think it would be good to have an introduction statement clarifying that.
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gen-art mailing list
>> Gen-art@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email