IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis-12

Orit Levin <oritl@microsoft.com> Mon, 12 September 2016 21:25 UTC

Return-Path: <oritl@microsoft.com>
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 2BF1712B123; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.022
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.022 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=microsoft.com
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 fIYecYn6ImCk; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam02on0127.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.36.127]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF82D12B11B; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 14:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=zVbtOnqb+0T/33BfXwoAc7gc0+WSAyT/YX7Q983/0QA=; b=lIed3nyUO7AiSMkhXI82hn/NCsNSlwZRA65CfnDf2voZ0a+bkp3P6lMyr/Wxs3Ew+0fy/+K85TYmM9t0RYS5j4lqX3Pc6Z0E07a3ShxRDHoRQ6Fubk5VGG5KHEGJ3i5Bon1sFt5Nyq2Dnj5C0Nt8EEYeDLHnI3bvmoHy26dHw3w=
Received: from MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.175.135.21) by MWHPR03MB2864.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.175.135.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA_P384) id 15.1.557.21; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 21:25:46 +0000
Received: from MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.175.135.21]) by MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.175.135.21]) with mapi id 15.01.0557.032; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 21:25:46 +0000
From: Orit Levin <oritl@microsoft.com>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis-12
Thread-Index: AdH8vhVYnPtwgrKzSRqH1hQhAe++awGnTWAAAVy9LoAAgyjQ0AABL12AAALhZQAAEKn4AAAyUZuAAE/vBmA=
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 21:25:45 +0000
Message-ID: <MWHPR03MB2863B2510E357E274A687D47ADFF0@MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <MWHPR03MB28639038A6D48CE94C9622FBADEA0@MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <2b1eb276-6341-70dc-5ce5-5375a0035a93@ericsson.com> <8435a4ad-4094-e065-63bc-7d096f769605@tomh.org> <MWHPR03MB2863EAB99D1EFA1F24AB7C71ADFA0@MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <13dbd594-d201-be86-a036-741612be48a5@tomh.org> <MWHPR03MB2863F3AB99979F38BF49E21BADFA0@MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <6f151dc4-b81f-ecf5-16f4-c63ecfe16471@ericsson.com> <5C2358E6-0486-42BD-9712-43A956F07192@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <5C2358E6-0486-42BD-9712-43A956F07192@piuha.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=oritl@microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [131.107.159.232]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1eafdd92-b7e6-44ce-a4c0-08d3db535c0f
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; MWHPR03MB2864; 6:Z0sXolzG+OqM5THxYksK1VdqW/DQ7zRpzCqp3xmgQdHU9jfz6cZ2fMCU+UHAaz7VPRFi/I12L3r7yW/KortFH8wQwM7oAG1MkLXQwmD40C4VqN/++uq+8v6BBN0wC1X61Uv5lHWcHX0EAZ4/RXQdLLYRQT8wN13JOX1nP0X8PCNxvOiocSjsl+Edz/QagT37iLeA1u+xxzNM8Ex0aWiHNiYUv21ufXxX5lBKFQ0fxKAKGXJT6YW5WJPMl0lW0uRCDYN2PBWe4PF3Nd4u32G/jSmRH9ylR4IAYK92IUofKWG1PkJOerCTsVndo1L1BNYoAveDGQmmVhBpKvkCCO/nzw==; 5:wMM12SG1h/dcF7KTDRiKuzMP+CNBp6+rS9qP3/MhpiAUngFXiPe52gOcM1E9i2FjAYZBRnYXdKw7Y6VOk6wzSrhT//LbVI26XAsgjm8FywonDRJaSVk07NTcIx3bb+KUFv4U7WVbjamhVAdwXDGAWA==; 24:ytAgnYiYB4BxaylUexvuTD0ZzEavXzDPOhGZZTdYeI8t27Cd4sSsfrAxO9Oz/i5PAWYY6JJM8SeADdL+g4tnTT2KNQmA1qMOrDBxTsBS/Ko=; 7:49UVbtExBtHGRVr/eXZtcgRyhnqOzX3MivNvRbYXJvafWe41v5ZDRJElGp9HWZljcGqh3o68gejmzfbsZdyAQiF8m5WkKszLSONpIsVZjMCZFAFEjo7OtasFIROoIlhrKGiDz4gHeFBWeYDFAU5o/zImv7IIYv2c+YJsEqJxF9xPGu2XE7LhNFc2PnBPwyYr5CchJzPlfdeJ0Vsso+CUzKm5lxjh9AXEUeZopjYjrd3NOZjJkORlmUuyKcgggPjB
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:MWHPR03MB2864;
x-o365ent-eop-header: Message processed by - O365_ENT: Allow from ranges (Engineering ONLY)
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MWHPR03MB28641F515AA524B788CDF1F9ADFF0@MWHPR03MB2864.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(37575265505322)(788757137089);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425038)(6040176)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001)(6055026)(61426038)(61427038); SRVR:MWHPR03MB2864; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:MWHPR03MB2864;
x-forefront-prvs: 006339698F
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(7916002)(13464003)(377454003)(189002)(199003)(76176999)(7736002)(11100500001)(2906002)(5005710100001)(50986999)(10400500002)(77096005)(4326007)(68736007)(86612001)(3660700001)(7696004)(19580405001)(8990500004)(92566002)(97736004)(5001770100001)(10290500002)(106356001)(33656002)(5660300001)(105586002)(99286002)(122556002)(81156014)(2900100001)(230783001)(19580395003)(6116002)(87936001)(9686002)(7846002)(102836003)(5002640100001)(8676002)(3846002)(66066001)(54356999)(8936002)(101416001)(305945005)(93886004)(86362001)(76576001)(81166006)(74316002)(586003)(2950100001)(10090500001)(189998001)(3280700002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:MWHPR03MB2864; H:MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Sep 2016 21:25:46.0794 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MWHPR03MB2864
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/HgAwoPTH7LxYys7fLjpYA_ytNOw>
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, Tom Henderson <tomh@tomh.org>, "draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis.all@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis-12
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: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 21:25:51 -0000

Gonzalo and Jari,
To clarify, my comment was about the sentence in the Abstract saying:
"The same LOCATOR_SET parameter can also be used to support end-host-multihoming, but the procedures are out of scope for this document and are specified elsewhere."

My suggestion is to replace this with "The LOCATOR_SET parameter can also be used to support end host multihoming.  This functionality is specified in RFC[Replace with the RFC number for draft-ietf-hip-multihoming]".

If this is not an accepted language, then I suggest removing the sentence quoted above from the Abstract altogether. There is no need for it. Reference to draft-ietf-hip-multihoming already exists in the text and in the "Informative references" section of the document.

The reason behind my comment is that the current open ended sentence doesn't provide useful information and might create confusion as I explained in my original comments. I don't feel strongly about the exact way this comment gets addressed, though.

Thanks,
Orit.
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@piuha.net] 
Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 11:38 PM
To: Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>
Cc: Orit Levin <oritl@microsoft.com>; Tom Henderson <tomh@tomh.org>; draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis.all@ietf.org; General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis-12

I think the wording as it is on -13 is fine. I.e., RFC number but no reference. I wouldn't necessarily use RFC numbers even in general in abstract, but "This RFC replaces RFC nnnn." I think is fine and appropriate.

Jari

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status