[Gen-art] Re: Gen-Art LC Review: draft-ietf-ipv6-ra-flags-option-01.txt

On Aug 20, 2007, at 9:46 AM, ext Brian Haberman wrote:

> Hi Joel,
>      Thanks for the review.  I see no problem with making the  
> suggested change on length handling to clarify behavior.

I am in agreement as well.

Bob

>
> Regards,
> Brian
>
>
> Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>> I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
>> reviewer for this draft
>>     IPv6 Router Advertisement Flags Option
>> (for background on Gen-ART, please seehttp://www.alvestrand.no/ 
>> ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
>> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
>> you may receive.
>> Document: draft-ietf-ipv6-ra-flags-option-01.txt
>> Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
>> Review Date:  19-August-2007
>> IETF LC End Date: 2007-08-31
>> IESG Telechat date: (if known) 2007-09-06
>> Summary:
>> This document is ready for publication as a proposed standard.
>> I would change the length handling text a bit if I were writing  
>> it, so I have included that suggestion as part of my comments.
>> There is a good chance that in this particular case all of my  
>> comments below are too picky, but they are provided for the  
>> information of the general area chair.
>> Comments:
>> As a general observation, it is usually a bad idea for chairs to  
>> be authors of documents in their working group.  If we really  
>> don't have enough active participants in the IPv6 working group to  
>> get someone else to write this, we have a much larger problem.
>> The document says that the length of the option is 1.  This is in  
>> multiples of 8 octets, so there is lots of room.
>> However, the text explicitly says that the length should be  
>> checked in case of future expansion.  But it does not specify what  
>> to do if the length is not 1.
>> I would recommend that the text explicitly allow for lengths  
>> greater than 1, and simply indicate that bits past those  
>> understood by the receiver are too be ignored.  There could  
>> probably also be a sentence indicating that since bits are to be  
>> defined in order, this allows a receiver to properly recognize the  
>> bits it understands.

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art