[Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-6lo-dispatch-iana-registry-06

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Wed, 23 November 2016 17:06 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32A4A129F47 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:06:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WKt1R1AsC8w6 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:06:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BAE812A029 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 08:59:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0513300AF0 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:49:16 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net []) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id V0ZeqouXgACg for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:49:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [] (pool-108-45-101-150.washdc.fios.verizon.net []) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 311EE3005CA; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:49:15 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <EE7359A5-ACD3-4CD1-B1B0-E01579203FFE@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:57:17 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <ED803ECC-BB80-4415-AA6A-0CD52C9A2179@vigilsec.com>
References: <EE7359A5-ACD3-4CD1-B1B0-E01579203FFE@gmail.com>
To: draft-ietf-6lo-dispatch-iana-registry.all@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/6z82ZxH4JASwI5bGOU9erMSKzpA>
Cc: IETF Gen-ART <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-6lo-dispatch-iana-registry-06
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, 23 Nov 2016 17:06:13 -0000

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 wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

Document: draft-ietf-6lo-dispatch-iana-registry-06
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review Date: 2016-11-23
IETF LC End Date: 2016-12-08
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary: Almost Ready

Major Concerns: None

Minor Concerns

In Section 3, it says:

   ... The values are from 0 to 255.  Values 0 and 255 are reserved
   for future use.  These values are assigned by IANA. ...

The use of "these values" is ambiguous.  I think that you mean the
values from 1 to 254, but based on the placement of this sentence, it
could mean 0 and 255.  Please reword to be very clear.

In Section 3.1, it says:

   ... The closer to the end of the packet are the EET's, the
   higher chance there is that a legacy node will recognize and
   successfully process some dispatch type [RFC4944] before the EET and
   then ignore the EET instead of dropping the entire packet.

I cannot figure out the first part of the sentence.  After reading it 
several times, I think the sentence it trying to say that placing an
EET toward the front of the packet has a greater probability of
causing the packet to be dropped than placing the same EET later in
the packet.  Please reword.

In Section 4, it says:

   [RFC5226] section 4.1 also indicates that "Specification Required"
   implies a Designated Expert review of the public specification
   requesting registration of the ESC Extension Type values.

s/implies/calls for/


The first paragraph of the Introduction has two sentences that begin
with "However".  I think some minor rewording would make the intent
more clear to all readers.

The Introduction says:

   ...  However, in recent years with 6lowpan deployments,
   implementations and standards organizations have started using the
   ESC extension bytes and co-ordination between the respective
   organizations and IETF/IANA is needed.

First: s/co-ordination/coordination/

Second: I am glad that we are seeing deployment.  That said, deployment
itself is not a reason for coordination.  Rather, it seems that the
experience has highlighted the need for an updated IANA registration

In Section 3:
s/Extended Dispatch Payload(EDP)/Extended Dispatch Payload(EDP)/

In Section 4:
s/IANA section/IANA Considerations section/