Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-geopriv-held-measurements-07

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Thu, 09 May 2013 04:29 UTC

From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@skype.net>
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-geopriv-held-measurements-07
Thread-Index: Ac5LoVxO4hekYk/jSJOTpknnSS0FiwAr/WSAAAcdK/Q=
Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 04:29:20 +0000
Message-ID: <ljd7dtiitju20hviy1hndvi8.1368073755428@email.android.com>
References: <5189CE88.2070902@ericsson.com>, <88EA7D224AA4F24F9D7628368F7572A911BE62DB@TK5EX14MBXC254.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <88EA7D224AA4F24F9D7628368F7572A911BE62DB@TK5EX14MBXC254.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-geopriv-held-measurements.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-geopriv-held-measurements.all@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-geopriv-held-measurements-07
Precedence: list

Hi Martin,
Thank you for the quick response. I am fine with all the changes you have proposed. I will look at the next rev as soon as it becomes available.

Thanks
Suresh



----- Original Message -----
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@skype.net>
To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-geopriv-held-measurements.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-geopriv-held-measurements.all@tools.ietf.org>
Sent: 5/8/2013 5:06 PM
Subject: RE: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-geopriv-held-measurements-07



Thanks Suresh.

I've made the changes in the -08 that I'm holding for AD go-ahead.  I'll try to remember to send you a note when this goes out.

> Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a Proposed
> Standard, but I have a few minor comments that you may wish to address.
>
> * Section 5.2
>
> - The Interface-Id option is the DHCPv6 equivalent of the circuit
> identifier defined in RFC3046. Please add a reference to Section 22.18 of
> RFC3315 that describes this option.

Got it.  Thanks.

> - Is there any specific reason that the giaddr is being specified using
> the IPv4-mapped IPv6 address format? From my reading giaddr is of type
> bt:ipAddressType and it allows specification of both IPv4 and IPv6
> addresses natively.

Yeah, that is strange.  I'll use a "normal" address.  (I think that I was just testing out schema validation in the examples and it leaked out.)

> * Section 8.3 Page 44
>
> IPv4-compatible addresses have been deprecated in the IPv6 addressing
> architecture (RFC4291) and need not be supported here.

That's true, but deprecated != MUST NOT use.  If it's all the same to you, I'd rather just leave as is.  If I were to make a change, it would be to remove acceptance of the dotted quad portion entirely.  But I think that the mapped address form is in use.  I'd have to check with the working group on that.

> * Section 8.7 Page 53
>
> I think there may be an off-by-one error here.
>  <xs:maxInclusive value="268435456"/>

Yes, good catch.  Either down by one or maxExclusive :)

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-… Suresh Krishnan
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Martin Thomson
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-i… Suresh Krishnan