[Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-option-11

[Roni Even <[e-mail]>]

Reviewer: Roni Even
Review result: Almost Ready

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-softwire-multicast-prefix-option-11
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review Date:2017-1-9
IETF LC End Date: 2017–1-12
IESG Telechat date:  

Summary: This draft is almost  ready for publication as a standard
track RFC.


Major issues:

Minor issues:

1.	In section 4 first paragraph say “DHCP servers supporting
OPTION_V6_PREFIX64 should be configured with U_PREFIX64 and at least
one multicast PREFIX64 (i.e., ASM_PREFIX64 and/or SSM_PREFIX64).” From
the rest of the section I understand that for SSM deployments both
U_PREFIX64 and SSM_PREFIX64 MUST be configured.
What is the reason for “should” in the first paragraph? Are there
cases where ASM_PREFIX64 or ASM_PREFIX64 and SSM_PREFIX64 are
specified and there is no need to specify U_PREFIX64, maybe these
cases should be described.


Nits/editorial comments:
1.	RFC2119 keywords in the document are sometime capitalized and
sometime not. I think it will be good to have consistency and if they
do not intend to have RFC2119 semantics some other words should be
used