IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Gen-art] Gen-art LC review: draft-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64-04

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Mon, 03 February 2014 23:06 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.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 5B0261A027B; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 15:06:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.036
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] 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 ZBEVV-F5TbfS; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 15:06:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6253F1A0267; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 15:06:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from unnumerable.local (pool-173-71-10-88.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.71.10.88]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s13N6Tco047547 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 3 Feb 2014 17:06:29 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <52F020FE.6090904@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 17:06:38 -0600
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, pcp@ietf.org, draft-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64@tools.ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.71.10.88 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC review: draft-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64-04
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: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 23:06:30 -0000

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-pcp-nat64-prefix64-04
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date: 3-Jan-2014
IETF LC End Date: 4-Jan-2014
IESG Telechat date: Unknown

Summary: Ready with Nits

Nits/editorial comments:

There are several references to expired drafts (some very expired).
If those are not going to progress, the details you wanted to call out 
would be better moved here.

It's not clear which of the results in nat64-experiments you are 
pointing to for support for this document.
Is the reference necessary? If so, can it be made more specific.

In section 4.1, you restate the allowed values for length from RFC6052. 
Consider making the statement
even clearer that these values are a consequence of RFC6052 and aren't 
being defined by this document.
Something like "The allowed values are specified in RFC6052 (currently 
4,5,6,7,8,12).
(I almost didn't include this since that set's not likely to change, but 
somebody might copy the style...)

RjS

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email