Return-Path: 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 453FE12D5B5 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:41:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 ZEv2IKSrAICn for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:41:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usplmg20.ericsson.net (usplmg20.ericsson.net [198.24.6.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24F3712D5B2 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:41:27 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c618062d-980fb98000000a08-b4-57b7d265575e Received: from EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.93]) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 3E.8A.02568.562D7B75; Sat, 20 Aug 2016 05:45:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EUSAAMB107.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.124]) by EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.93]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 23:33:57 -0400 From: Meral Shirazipour To: "draft-ietf-hip-multihoming.all@tools.ietf.org" , "gen-art@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-hip-multihoming-10 Thread-Index: AdH6k6LMgSW2LGUNTiWWRRevxe5jdw== Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 03:33:57 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.11] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A4E6D7AE1eusaamb107erics_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrKLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPrG7ape3hBv8vClg8OTyL0eLqq88s DkweS5b8ZPL4cvkzWwBTFJdNSmpOZllqkb5dAlfGry/vGAsazSt2fFzN3sA4x6CLkZNDQsBE Yu7F7UxdjFwcQgIbGCU2Xz7FBuEsZ5TYv3UGC0gVm4CFxPbfz1lBEiICfYwSS68dZQVJCAs4 SbSuOwFWJCLgLjHx2H0mCFtP4tnSTWA1LAKqEjdfnQWr4RXwlZj8ux+shlFATOL7qTVgNrOA uMStJ/OZIE4SkFiy5zwzhC0q8fLxP1YIW0ni4+/57BD1+RKLnt9mh5gpKHFy5hOWCYyCs5CM moWkbBaSMoi4jsSC3Z/YIGxtiWULXzPD2GcOPGZCFl/AyL6KkaO0uCAnN93IYBMjMPCPSbDp 7mC8P93zEKMAB6MSD6+C5/ZwIdbEsuLK3EOMEhzMSiK87eeAQrwpiZVVqUX58UWlOanFhxil OViUxHnFHimGCwmkJ5akZqemFqQWwWSZODilGhhdC6yy73+KcJz3anHN5TVVP7I4+Vc6Hs07 zPDH2Vx9HtdmkTw5u68JNa09Dh51R1Lkd7+POr7yW4WioYfHmqqKU1KiS6dW/Wo9PCV9g4Nk t3/KQp0DE3s/hor96+F79vtWtTiPcvqVb2mLlq0SVI9zSpr3/Gm+4tY7F+ZPvhGUlcu868fe tdpKLMUZiYZazEXFiQAfPIqOeAIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-hip-multihoming-10 X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 03:41:29 -0000 --_000_ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A4E6D7AE1eusaamb107erics_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 t= he IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call c= omments. For more information, please see the FAQ at . Document: draft-ietf-hip-multihoming-10 Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour Review Date: 2016-08-19 IETF LC End Date: 2016-08-25 IESG Telechat date: NA Summary: This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC, but I have some= comments (nits). Major issues: Minor issues: Nits/editorial comments: -[Page 4], "ESP transform [RFC7402]"--typo?-->"ESP transport [RFC7402]" -[Page 4], please spell out SPI at first use: "Security Parameter Index (SP= I)" -[Page 5], "elements of procedure,"--->"elements of the procedure." -[Page 6], "in R1, I2, or R2 packets"..., suggestion to add ref. to RFC740= 1 here. -[Page 6], "(ESP SAs may have an anti-replay window sensitive to reordering= )", suggestion to add ref. to RFC4303 here. -[Page 8], "ACTIVE statte"--typo-->"ACTIVE state" -[Page 13], "that a host send"--->"that a host sends" -[Page 16], ". Mark all addresses....", not clear who marks? the host?. It= would be better to clarify the sentence. -[Page 18], "capabilities for mobility also carry over to mobility", did we= mean to multihoming? -[Page 18], "threats discussed in [RFC4218] involves"--no s-->"threats disc= ussed in [RFC4218] involve" Best Regards, Meral --- Meral Shirazipour Ericsson Research www.ericsson.com --_000_ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A4E6D7AE1eusaamb107erics_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. T= he General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being proc= essed by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments jus= t like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/are= a/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq> .

 

 

Document: draft-ietf-hip-multihoming-10

Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour

Review Date: 2016-08-19

IETF LC End Date:  2016-08-25

IESG Telechat date: NA

 

 

Summary:

This draft is ready to be published as Standards Tra= ck RFC, but I have some comments (nits).

 

Major issues:

 

Minor issues:

 

Nits/editorial comments:

-[Page 4], "ESP transform [RFC7402]"--typo= ?-->"ESP transport [RFC7402]"

-[Page 4], please spell out SPI at first use: "= Security Parameter Index (SPI)"

-[Page 5], "elements of procedure,"--->= "elements of the procedure."

-[Page 6], "in R1, I2, or R2 packets"..., = suggestion to add ref. to  RFC7401 here.

-[Page 6], "(ESP SAs may have an anti-replay wi= ndow sensitive to reordering)", suggestion to add ref. to RFC4303 here= .

-[Page 8], "ACTIVE statte"--typo-->&quo= t;ACTIVE state"

-[Page 13], "that a host send"--->"= ;that a host sends"

-[Page 16], ".  Mark all addresses....&quo= t;, not clear who marks? the host?. It would be better to clarify the sente= nce.

-[Page 18], "capabilities for mobility also car= ry over to mobility", did we mean to multihoming?

-[Page 18], "threats discussed in [RFC4218] inv= olves"--no s-->"threats discussed in [RFC4218] involve"

 

 

 

Best Regards,

Meral

---

Meral Shirazipour

Ericsson

Research

www.ericsson.com

--_000_ABCAA4EF18F17B4FB619EA93DEF7939A4E6D7AE1eusaamb107erics_--