Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-09

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Tue, 01 April 2014 12:30 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 E8A6F1A06B7 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 05:30:52 -0700 (PDT)
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 u8b6eGBLEa2r for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 05:30:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias244.francetelecom.com [80.12.204.244]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 191DC1A06B6 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 05:30:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omfeda06.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.199]) by omfeda10.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 92767374490; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 14:30:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from PUEXCH81.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.34]) by omfeda06.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 2050BC8101; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 14:30:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.11]) by PUEXCH81.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.34]) with mapi; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 14:30:28 +0200
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 14:30:18 +0200
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-09
Thread-Index: Ac9Fpwf/9xTcRrHXRFa3srTdvkpCagBh4qPQADXLCnAAA8O1kAABVDUwAWL3N0A=
Message-ID: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F54484A22@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D25AC4A@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F528DE334@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D25FC1D@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F528DE78F@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D25FFB5@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D25FFB5@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
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_94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F54484A22PUEXCB1Bnante_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.3.2322014, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2014.4.1.90014
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/7AmegyLZY2rzAzASZ6HGaD-KorM
Cc: "draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp.all@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-09
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: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 12:30:53 -0000

Dear Christer,

FYI, a new version is now available online. The new version integrates your comments. You may double check at this url:

http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?difftype=--hwdiff&url2=draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-10.txt

Cheers,
Med

De : Christer Holmberg [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com]
Envoyé : mardi 25 mars 2014 12:06
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; gen-art@ietf.org
Cc : draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp.all@tools.ietf.org
Objet : RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-09

Thanks! :)

That addresses all my issues.

Regards,

Christer

From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> [mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com]
Sent: 25. maaliskuuta 2014 12:29
To: Christer Holmberg; gen-art@ietf.org<mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp.all@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp.all@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-09

Dear Christer,

Your proposed text reflects exactly the intent. I updated my local copy of the draft accordingly.

Thank you for the review.

Cheers,
Med


De : Christer Holmberg [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com]
Envoyé : mardi 25 mars 2014 09:50
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; gen-art@ietf.org<mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
Cc : draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp.all@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp.all@tools.ietf.org>
Objet : RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-09

Hi Med,

I am ok with most of your replies, but I still have an issue with the deployment scenario statement.

Q1_A:

The Abstract (and, later, also the Introduction) says: "The use of DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 depends on the PCP deployment scenario."

I think this is a little unclear. Would it be possible to add some extra text, describing in what type of scenarios the mechanism is applicable?

[Med] The decision to use DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 is deployment-specific. The text calls out one particular deployment case where dhcpv6 is used to configure an IPv4 PCP server (see section 5). It is out of scope of the document to list in which cases dhcpv4, dhcpv6, or both will be used to configure pcp servers. I suggest to maintain that sentence as it is.

[Christer] RFC 6887 lists different scenarios, and when reading the sentence above I get a picture that usage of DHCPv4/DHCPv6 applies specifically to some of those scenarios, but not to others.

So, if the applicable scenarios are out of the scope of the document, then you should say that. Perhaps something like:

"The use of DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 depends on the PCP deployment scenario. The set of deployment scenarios to which use of DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 apply are outside the scope of this document."

Regards,

Christer