Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-dhc-access-network-identifier-08.txt
Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Thu, 17 September 2015 13:28 UTC
Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 5CF5A1B2D35 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 06:28:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 6qORfGbV3V6N for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 06:28:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE1D1B2FC3 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21E212CD02; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:28:00 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G52D9zUxpQR6; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:27:59 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 804942CC5C; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:27:57 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_499BB102-ECBE-4045-BE9E-992B40C1E9E4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.1
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <201506031455.t53EtFBs088831@givry.fdupont.fr>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 06:27:54 -0700
Message-Id: <68113F69-C6DD-49B0-8128-1D65FB0A06C0@piuha.net>
References: <201506031455.t53EtFBs088831@givry.fdupont.fr>
To: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/l7aUg3m0AFghMDw1VEo181SxPyM>
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dhc-access-network-identifier.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-dhc-access-network-identifier-08.txt
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: <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: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:28:07 -0000
Thanks for your review, Francis. Authors, you’ve taken these notes into account? Jari On 03 Jun 2015, at 07:55, Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr> wrote: > 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-dhc-access-network-identifier-08.txt > Reviewer: Francis Dupont > Review Date: 20150601 > IETF LC End Date: 20150609 > IESG Telechat date: unknown > > Summary: Ready > > Major issues: None > > Minor issues: None > > Nits/editorial comments: > - ToC page 2 and 10 page 16: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments > (BTW you wrote behavior, not behaviour, so please keep US spelling :-) > > - 3 page 5: I was looking for the RFC 2119 reference there but > it was just after the Abstract. So I went to the RFC-Editor webpages > to read what the last RFC Style Guide says: the requirement language > section is supposed to be in the body (vs headers) after the introduction > (i.e., exactly where I expected to find it :-). > Note it doesn't really matter and if something needs to be fixed it is > more likely the tool you used... > > - 4.3.1 page 7: Identifier[ANI]. > ^ insert a space here > > - 4.4.2 page 10: Ex: -> e.g., > > - 4.4.2 page 10: the DNS encoding is a bit ambiguous because there are > (too) many things in RFC 1035. I think you mean the wire format (vs > text format) but perhaps it should be better to be more accurate in > the wording? > > - 7 page 14 (twice): must -> MUST. > > - 7 page 14: I suggest to change: > ... When generating a response, the server echoes > back Relay Agent Information options > > by > > ... When generating a response, the server SHALL > echo back Relay Agent Information options > > - 9 page 15: And, [RFC3118] and [RFC3315] -> [RFC3118] and [RFC3315] > > - 9 page 15: draft-ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6-07.txt is under IESG review, > perhaps will be published before your document, and obsoletes > a part of the argument (unfortunately not the "in active use" > even the day before my review I finished the code of a secure DHCPv6 > prototype :-). > > - authors' addresses pages 17 and 18: no uniformity in the case of > country names (The UPU says upper case but this doesn't apply to > I-Ds/RFCs... The RFC-Editor will fix addresses). > > Regards > > Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr > > PS for native English speakers: is unsecure proper English? My speller > says insecure and unsecured are but not unsecure. > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
- [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-dhc-access-network… Francis Dupont
- [Gen-art] Insecure vs Unsecure [was Re: review of… Elwyn Davies
- Re: [Gen-art] Insecure vs Unsecure [was Re: revie… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-dhc-access-net… Jari Arkko
- Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-dhc-access-net… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)