IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis-12

Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> Wed, 14 September 2016 09:26 UTC

Return-Path: <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>
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 1A25712B21E; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:26:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 AQH30OQrD342; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sessmg22.ericsson.net (sessmg22.ericsson.net [193.180.251.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AA0112B21A; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb3a-e95069800000099a-81-57d917b27981
Received: from ESESSHC005.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.183.33]) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 58.33.02458.2B719D75; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 11:26:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [147.214.22.74] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.301.0; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 11:26:08 +0200
To: Orit Levin <oritl@microsoft.com>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
References: <MWHPR03MB28639038A6D48CE94C9622FBADEA0@MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <2b1eb276-6341-70dc-5ce5-5375a0035a93@ericsson.com> <8435a4ad-4094-e065-63bc-7d096f769605@tomh.org> <MWHPR03MB2863EAB99D1EFA1F24AB7C71ADFA0@MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <13dbd594-d201-be86-a036-741612be48a5@tomh.org> <MWHPR03MB2863F3AB99979F38BF49E21BADFA0@MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <6f151dc4-b81f-ecf5-16f4-c63ecfe16471@ericsson.com> <5C2358E6-0486-42BD-9712-43A956F07192@piuha.net> <MWHPR03MB2863B2510E357E274A687D47ADFF0@MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
From: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
Message-ID: <3412ab5e-12d2-90c2-3993-15bc16d2e9b7@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 11:26:08 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR03MB2863B2510E357E274A687D47ADFF0@MWHPR03MB2863.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrLLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM2K7ou4m8ZvhBks+y1n8+3SA2eLqq88s FjP2rWCzuL9oN7NF490/TA6sHkuW/GTyaN3xl91j65LpbB57rmkEsERx2aSk5mSWpRbp2yVw ZVz4MIex4CFfxaz/BxgbGCfydDFycEgImEj0zufqYuTiEBJYzygx4cVmVghnNaPE4xfPWUCK hAXcJJZNzuli5OQQEXCXOLf8JxNEzQ0WiY6r29hBHGaB5YwShw8+YQWpYhOwkNhy6z4LiM0r YC9x9Nh1NhCbRUBVovfPY3YQW1QgRmL/rJnMEDWCEidnPgGr5xSIlbjR8QdsDrOAgcSRRXOg bHmJ7W/ngNULCWhLLH/WwjKBUWAWkvZZSFpmIWlZwMi8ilG0OLW4ODfdyEgvtSgzubg4P08v L7VkEyMwkA9u+W21g/Hgc8dDjAIcjEo8vAlsN8KFWBPLiitzDzFKcDArifBeErsZLsSbklhZ lVqUH19UmpNafIhRmoNFSZz339nr4UIC6YklqdmpqQWpRTBZJg5OqQbGzs8H/kd+lVvEyxbM ue9i6OUVhiwOGwQUgnVMi6bu8FvaH+ko1KMiG6BwdeHipq0nCifPfhdvGv9i6ieZvWvWPPsv aJK+ZGqqUfYHMQ8VjU8XJogtu1++6jrjvYbvMwJ3zVg5J2/RuZlZa5iY3sjbvbn62m+nw5e9 wjIKVW2+tguXpRsYC5vtVmIpzkg01GIuKk4EALrBsBRgAgAA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/kxLuGq_qlygxgLi2r7kxmD086cE>
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, Tom Henderson <tomh@tomh.org>, "draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis.all@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis-12
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 09:26:14 -0000

Hi,

both replacing the sentence with Orit's proposal or removing the
sentence altogether would work for me.

Thanks,

Gonzalo

On 12/09/2016 11:25 PM, Orit Levin wrote:
> Gonzalo and Jari,
> To clarify, my comment was about the sentence in the Abstract saying:
> "The same LOCATOR_SET parameter can also be used to support end-host-multihoming, but the procedures are out of scope for this document and are specified elsewhere."
> 
> My suggestion is to replace this with "The LOCATOR_SET parameter can also be used to support end host multihoming.  This functionality is specified in RFC[Replace with the RFC number for draft-ietf-hip-multihoming]".
> 
> If this is not an accepted language, then I suggest removing the sentence quoted above from the Abstract altogether. There is no need for it. Reference to draft-ietf-hip-multihoming already exists in the text and in the "Informative references" section of the document.
> 
> The reason behind my comment is that the current open ended sentence doesn't provide useful information and might create confusion as I explained in my original comments. I don't feel strongly about the exact way this comment gets addressed, though.
> 
> Thanks,
> Orit.
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@piuha.net] 
> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 11:38 PM
> To: Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>
> Cc: Orit Levin <oritl@microsoft.com>; Tom Henderson <tomh@tomh.org>; draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis.all@ietf.org; General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5206-bis-12
> 
> I think the wording as it is on -13 is fine. I.e., RFC number but no reference. I wouldn't necessarily use RFC numbers even in general in abstract, but "This RFC replaces RFC nnnn." I think is fine and appropriate.
> 
> Jari
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email