Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-clue-protocol-17.txt

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Tue, 20 November 2018 17:42 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF905130DC8; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 09:42:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=Y0tezTbD; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Q6g+uG1r
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 Rb7fO3LZ0LU9; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 09:42:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55F1F130DCD; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 09:42:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FDA724202; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:42:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:42:47 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm1; bh=f eaFKzyF1MpaPvm7yEHV9V5vg+B6/ZQpJS4jxXNl+6I=; b=Y0tezTbDhX0ln9WUu Q0+ZWOdqhDID/6nRCPLecmcFwW7GNrwNMuz02FMDK+d9/wTmp15pnNlJ6Cb7PYu0 OTepGjDDdW/AosObpMEXeyXHWj0uYdKj73t7YZyZs+JZhIMh+i8UnP9lUTxbI0uW yubMmiMAIceTe7y6mHwUkrjsT80WA2raLZVcq8D+ri81t8sZmK0nioftODT4BWoX ekVW1TzxVa0w0xCZJzfBjXT4rWacqv7NjJZu7UEhj9SNNM/F8IoSNmVIoZNRazhC B2O9IZKVoWSQHXvPzM1rOjH3ryCCBplveZP/HUHPMa/heDe+ixnbDbEngkyQzhdP BeNog==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=feaFKzyF1MpaPvm7yEHV9V5vg+B6/ZQpJS4jxXNl+ 6I=; b=Q6g+uG1rvVKYbECZwTBDdxTEyWc18Tsc8oucVXQbBxE3vhkkgchGH15NG BqQ73FhMcdB8M6Z2vDhsjK/b21MdjxbmunFgE0+iZRblujq+m4+G2ES4V1BN+XrH YX/58X5miSz1coajilVGWyqvQel+i8u+VKwimPW+9JvwwldSHCaHSOEBIobX3zQA GpIfN6Jk/NsC78uSPs9BXuc89bwtWS237tNMDSPEsmadi5AWHKqlz/Y/zai7tmbh BGxuJKTlbkNQ4yRlV8+AMZStMifrtZZzAjaH8/8076PDSYOUhh5Idq7zUCF759es TuGt7+4oQvAeQ7dgByc8JWsuOLayg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:lkf0WzCzy8N5mAg0mhosF6zmVkvzjJSj7Lvx1_NS1ay1liIxaIlS5g>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:lkf0W8FrG5MHo0igBQu_8saYT9uFOse838YLNXhdYZaknAr_HjvrwA> <xmx:lkf0W1fI-QPgZQNgSR4om1o4537yiZXH3cgMUvsQdLTPu3sp7NU7ow> <xmx:lkf0W-GAX6u-RWro7ZFPghwIPi3W_NhLHVsldSc_XxFn5IYhwkbveA> <xmx:lkf0W2XGDhaHT9fXvJ9ccMhgj7hlrQDHSSQAMi5MQH9NVdWuwT5MWQ> <xmx:lkf0W9JEj5NGk2xNFdZiIF59ezDriOEkcetEejTVB3x5MUoFptJFkQ> <xmx:l0f0W4VCOmcHDck2knudHmzrg4cuPDs0LTWauliiwl04pM8jk77sMQ>
Received: from rtp-alcoop-nitro5.cisco.com (unknown [173.38.117.92]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 38F57102DE; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:42:46 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <201810180859.w9I8xRaU022814@givry.fdupont.fr>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:42:45 -0500
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-clue-protocol.all@ietf.org, clue@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <73144965-FC20-453E-9206-6BB1B167053B@cooperw.in>
References: <201810180859.w9I8xRaU022814@givry.fdupont.fr>
To: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/hKyD-O2l_3y-WKtI1haw3wMVFk4>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-clue-protocol-17.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:42:56 -0000

Francis, thanks for your review. I have not seen a response yet so I’ve flagged your review in my No Objection ballot.

Alissa

> On Oct 18, 2018, at 4:59 AM, Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr> wrote:
> 
> 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-clue-protocol-17.txt
> Reviewer: Francis Dupont
> Review Date: 20181017
> IETF LC End Date: 20181017
> IESG Telechat date: unknown
> 
> Summary: Ready
> 
> Major issues: None
> 
> Minor issues: None
> 
> Nits/editorial comments: 
> I have a problem with the CLUE abbrev itself (which BTW is not in the
> RFC Editor abbrev list
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt):
> in theory the abbrev should be introduced at its first use in the Abstract
> and in the body (so 1 introduction) but this seems to be overkilling
> and not really solving the issue so I have a better proposal: ask
> the RFC Editor if it is not possible to add the CLUE abbrev in the
> list as a well known one.
> 
> - Abstract page 1: you use SCTP over DTLS so a transport over another
> transport. At the first view it looks strange but in fact it should be
> the simplest solution to add security to SCTP so I have no concern about
> this.
> 
> - 4 page 5 twice: version numbers are qualified as "single digit" which
> does not match the syntax 5 figure 1 page 8 nor examples: please remove
> these.
> 
> - 5 page 8: the version number syntax. BTW it allows a minor version
> to begin by a 0 followed by other digits which perhaps is not what
> you want.
> 
> - 5 page 8: same comment about examples: a priori 1.01 is legal and
>  it is not clear if it is the same than 1.1 ?
> 
> - 5 page 8 (before the previous one): procotol -> protocol
> 
> - 5.1 page 11: IMHO in "<supportedVersion> is provided ..."
>  it shoild be <supportedVersions>.
> 
> - 5.4 page 13: I noted you use the UK spelling for the type name
> (Acknowledgement vs. Acknowledgment).
> 
> - 5.7 page 17 figure 9 and 12.4.2 page 65:
> Please remove the final dot in " Low-level request error."
> 
> - 11 page 60: defence -> defense (UK vs US English)
> 
> - 12.4.1 page 64: estabilsh -> establish
> 
> - 12.4.2 page 65: Conficting -> Conflicting
> 
> Regards
> 
> Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art