[Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-problem-solution-03.txt
Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Tue, 27 November 2007 14:40 UTC
Return-path: <gen-art-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix1bg-0001ni-Fi; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:40:12 -0500
Received: from gen-art by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix1be-0001n3-G3 for gen-art-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:40:10 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix1be-0001mk-2x; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:40:10 -0500
Received: from imr2.ericy.com ([198.24.6.3]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ix1bd-0007fj-In; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:40:09 -0500
Received: from eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw751.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.51]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lAREe60I007863; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 08:40:06 -0600
Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.50]) by eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 27 Nov 2007 08:40:06 -0600
Received: from [142.133.10.140] ([142.133.10.140]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 27 Nov 2007 08:40:06 -0600
Message-ID: <474C2C88.4050906@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:41:12 -0500
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, sami.vaarala@iki.fi, espen@birdstep.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Nov 2007 14:40:06.0370 (UTC) FILETIME=[670E1C20:01C83103]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: fb6060cb60c0cea16e3f7219e40a0a81
Cc: mip4-chairs@tools.ietf.org, Henrik Levkowetz <henrik.levkowetz@ericsson.com>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-problem-solution-03.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-problem-solution-03.txt
For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Summary: This draft is well written and easy to read, but I do have a
couple of comments I would like addressed.
Meta comments
=============
* This is just my personal view but I am not sure if BCP is the right
intended status for this document. It requires changes to the node
implementations and requires behavioral changes on some nodes. Perhaps
needs to be Standards track
* T_MONITOR is a new configuration knob that is added to the MN (that
possibly requires changes to implementation). This needs to be clearly
stated prior to use. Also, it would be nice to mention the associated
signaling traffic reduction vs detection latency reduction compromise,
so that the admins can make an informed decision as to the value of this.
Minor
=====
Section 3.3
===========
Bullet 2: The following text is redundant since it is covered by
bullet 3.
"If a previous registration reply from the x-HA
has been received, the MN SHOULD de-register with the x-HA."
It makes sense to remove this
Section 3.4
===========
* It is not clear who this requirement is on?
"Therefore, it is required that x-HA and i-HA addresses MUST be different"
Can you please clarify who ensures this
Section 3.6
===========
* It is not clear what "inside" means here since it refers to the x-HA
The registration process can be improved in many ways. One simple
way is to make the x-HA detect whether a registration request came
from inside or outside. If it came from inside, the x-HA can simply
drop the registration request.
Editorial
=========
* Push the basic topology figure to right after the first paragraph of
section 2.
The draft does not have an Intended Status. From the ID tracker, I
figured out that it is BCP, but it is perhaps better to explicitly state
it in the draft.
Cheers
Suresh
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
- [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-p… Suresh Krishnan