Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03
"Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Mon, 27 January 2014 10:05 UTC
Return-Path: <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AFFF1A01DE; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 02:05:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 LrNmtDIo6_W8; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 02:05:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ee0-x230.google.com (mail-ee0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E4AA1A01D2; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 02:05:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ee0-f48.google.com with SMTP id t10so2127223eei.7 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 02:05:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:thread-index:content-language; bh=dIl1Z/B8WMVRLn4+g0iy9AJ4MpetQpHGIls3eP54Tg4=; b=K+KZPoX3b4K/PgzZozsDlBrWDT4wjbz1z2QF9/3CQ/jdM4uVafwMvNPI/4GHa4+xwz HXj/0iJL6esLIALbi8kJ8z6+4JL+QH9JbfXu5XHqcIKrXUMSyWr6ZUrnBDLKqBlZKuoj DqE4zkHq5YbQYHwXDKjAzIcsctbglEltRj8vgphyW6qVWssz8JPG7mhWUuatWEh7nWXw mEsrrxCiv7yuMD+GHCFGvCmKE6mZs9YbMHUj1uDh+UjcFqdLVlQVLE21wFnCuNnzJe1O xAJCJrmQ6MjJI9uXOlzVlPmpkFlRrj5be4vbxAOOA1I7FM1E53tA8eIR+X2vThsOQvBs Q9mg==
X-Received: by 10.14.211.131 with SMTP id w3mr17084233eeo.7.1390817149571; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 02:05:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from RoniE ([109.66.49.55]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o13sm40402995eex.19.2014.01.27.02.05.46 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Jan 2014 02:05:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
To: "'Reinaldo Penno (repenno)'" <repenno@cisco.com>, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com, draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org
References: <033d01cf1b42$854c10e0$8fe432a0$@gmail.com> <CF0B68F0.8395%repenno@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <CF0B68F0.8395%repenno@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:02:01 +0200
Message-ID: <035301cf1b46$d54ba980$7fe2fc80$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0354_01CF1B57.98D67550"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQCBFcQxKd1jXqufJNTVIZgvX5PLAp00YNqg
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 27 Jan 2014 10:05:55 -0000
Hi, This should be stated and I assume that it is not for standardization but not clear why the entity operating the PCP server needs it, is it described in another document. I am curious why querying the PCP server is out of scope and not is for further work. Roni From: Reinaldo Penno (repenno) [mailto:repenno@cisco.com] Sent: 27 January, 2014 11:39 AM To: Roni Even; mohamed.boucadair@orange.com; draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org Cc: ietf@ietf.org; gen-art@ietf.org Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03 Hi, The idea is that it can be seen by the entity operating the PCP Server. Thanks, From: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Date: Monday, January 27, 2014 at 1:31 AM To: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>, "draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org> Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org> Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03 Resent-From: <draft-alias-bounces@tools.ietf.org> Resent-To: <dthaler@microsoft.com>, <dwing@cisco.com>, "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>, Cisco Employee <repenno@cisco.com>, <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Resent-Date: Monday, January 27, 2014 at 1:35 AM Hi Med, Inline Roni From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com [mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com] Sent: 27 January, 2014 10:31 AM To: Roni Even; draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org Cc: ietf@ietf.org; gen-art@ietf.org Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03 Dear Roni, Thank you for the review. Please see inline. Cheers, Med De : Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv@gmail.com] Envoyé : dimanche 26 janvier 2014 09:13 À : draft-ietf-pcp-description-option.all@tools.ietf.org Cc : ietf@ietf.org; gen-art@ietf.org Objet : Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03 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-pcp-description-option-03 Reviewer: Roni Even Review Date:20141-26 IETF LC End Date: 20142-4 IESG Telechat date: Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard track RFC. Major issues: Minor issues: 1. I am not sure what the use of the description option is. I can see how to create one but as for usage the only text I can see is Querying the PCP server to get the description text of an existing mapping is out of scope. I think that the document should provide information about the purpose of this option. [Med] The main usage is for a user to associate a textual description with a mapping. This is captured by this text This option can be used by a user (or an application) to indicate a description associated with a given mapping such as "FTP server", "My remote access to my CP router", "Camera", "Network attached storage serve", etc. [Roni Even] This is motivation but it is not clear why the user does it if no one can see it or does anything with it. It is kept on the server but not used by anyone? Nits/editorial comments: 1. The IANA section should provide enough information to fill the registry http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcp-parameters/pcp-parameters.xml#options [Med] Required information as per RFC6887 is provided in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pcp-description-option-03#section-2. [Roni Even] So section 5 should point to the definition is section 2
- [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp-des… Roni Even
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp… mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp… Roni Even
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp… mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp… Roni Even
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp… Roni Even
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp… Reinaldo Penno (repenno)
- Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-pcp… Jari Arkko