Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option-04.txt

Juergen Quittek <Quittek@neclab.eu> Wed, 18 November 2015 22:53 UTC

From: Juergen Quittek <Quittek@neclab.eu>
To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>, "draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option.all@ietf.org>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option-04.txt
Thread-Index: AdEht7qbpNGMPV5LTXS24OfwQP9ungAm6gcw
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 22:52:50 +0000
Message-ID: <9AB93E4127C26F4BA7829DEFDCE5A6E8A99F6F74@PALLENE.office.hd>
References: <E87B771635882B4BA20096B589152EF63AA5ABFC@eusaamb107.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <E87B771635882B4BA20096B589152EF63AA5ABFC@eusaamb107.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/ihyxlgyLea9JEZwmFRghvOoJJBg>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option-04.txt
Precedence: list

Dear Suresh,

Thank you for your helpful comments.
Please find replies inline.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Suresh Krishnan [mailto:suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com]
> Sent: Mittwoch, 18. November 2015 05:15
> To: draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option.all@ietf.org; General Area Review Team
> Subject: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option-04.txt
> 
> 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 wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before
> posting a new version of the draft.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-pcp-third-party-id-option-04.txt
> Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan
> Review Date: 2015/11/17
> IESG Telechat date: 2015/11/19
> 
> Summary: The draft is almost ready for publication as a Proposed Standard but
> I do have a major issue that needs to be addressed.
> 
> Major
> =====
> 
> * Section 5.2
> 
> The draft is a bit underspecified on how the THIRD_PARTY_ID carried in the
> option is compared to existing entries in the mapping table in the processing
> of request messages. Given that the option itself is loosely specified
> (allowing pretty much anything to be used as the ID) I think it is going to
> be very difficult to realize interoperable implementations unless the
> comparison method is clearly specified. e.g. Consider one of the options for
> THIRD_PARTY_ID described in the document - the MAC address. It could be
> carried as 48 bits binary (aabbccddeeff), hyphen delimited string of hex
> digits ("aa-bb-cc-dd-ee-ff") , colon delimited string of hex digits
> ("aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff") with upper case and lower case variants. If you intend
> this to be an exact bit by bit comparison, it would be helpful if you state
> it explicitly. If not, please state that as well.

This is a very good catch. We will address this issue in the next revision of the draft 
and make sure we specify the comparison precisely.

> Minor
> =====
> 
> * IANA considerations
> 
> "  [NOTE for IANA: Please allocate a PCP Option Code at
>     http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcp-parameters/pcp-
>     parameters.xml#option-rules]"
> 
> The URL for this registry is wrong. Did you mean
> 
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcp-parameters/pcp-
> parameters.xml#options
> 
> instead?

Yes. Thanks. We will fix it.

Best regards,
    Juergen


> Thanks
> Suresh
>

[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-p… Suresh Krishnan
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ie… Jari Arkko
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ie… Juergen Quittek