Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-46

[NABIL BENAMAR <[e-mail]>]

Dear Roni,

Thank you for your review.
Please, see my answers below.






On Sun, Jun 16, 2019, 09:52 Roni Even via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Reviewer: Roni Even
> Review result: Almost Ready
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
>
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-??
> Reviewer: Roni Even
> Review Date: 2019-06-16
> IETF LC End Date: 2019-06-26
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>
> Summary:
> The document is almost ready for publication as a standard track RFC
>
> Major issues:
>
> Minor issues:
>
> 1. Section 4.2  says "IP packets MUST be transmitted over 802.11-OCB media
> as
> QoS Data" while appendix F say "The STA may send data frames of subtype
> Data,
> Null, QoS Data, and
>       QoS Null.
>

I will update the appendix to reflect the text in section 4.2.

>
> 2. In section 5.2 "The policy dictating when the MAC address is changed on
> the
> 802.11-OCB interface is to-be-determined.". Reading the next sentence it
> looks
> to me that this is needed as part of the solution and should not be left
> for
> the unknown future.
>

Should we reformulate here?

>
> 3. In Appendix I 4th paragraph " However, this does not apply if TBD TBD
> TBD. "
> . What are the TBDs?
>

The whole sentence will be removed.

>
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 1. In appendix I last paragraph "Support of RFC 8505 is may be implemented
> on
> OCB." should be "Support of RFC 8505 may be implemented on OCB." 2. In
> Appendix
> I "OCB nodes that support RFC 8505 would support the 6LN operation in
> order to
> act as a host".  I think that instead of "would" it should be "should"
> also if
> this is a recommendation why not have this paragraph not in an appendix
> with
> "MAY" and "SHOULD
>


Agreed.

>
>
>