IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port-06.txt

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Tue, 28 November 2017 21:11 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 459B8127873; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:11:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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=KbrXCD+V; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=IDCT3rkV
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 CImw1uj9hR05; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:10:59 -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 1C34F124205; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:10:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578B120D27; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:10:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:10:54 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=8JjMVt6L5u4VU/Zw0cio+uVZmoVcC R5ZHu0BV+R0jt8=; b=KbrXCD+V3MepBWeTrI1Qay/vwGCdRp2ffHXf43jryGQ+8 W27JZfge5LhCflkRNQGfrYLE84sHwJPq4fo/PA/13iM3BdB8UFm/dsgCuzM7Q1cp HAVfcxDtYeJB8/HEH5HXZg6XeuI8s88LsR2PPXgt5fQNigcd8AkiklBbhU9oAym7 hnMRBpqsUhNBOKUW21Y+gXSWRMKelrnkaAQI/QfzJ4i7y/rL2sDl7imyHhoXdNSU jideM2+smyGWh9qEZO5vddGWA6pgWK2pkjQdzge+X1XMXpdhlFRbC5DRyKsHLeJQ BywEN3SV+6SWZVjTfw09xDituQKuvmxo6h1v0y2yQ==
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-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=8JjMVt 6L5u4VU/Zw0cio+uVZmoVcCR5ZHu0BV+R0jt8=; b=IDCT3rkVy0Bb8yBAhxkdIk JH4vNahVO55st05dVbJNV2Pp0lWhNzf9OnBn71oRUXQLk55pocgfYLhlzMaum3Mp mWP0lMOXZrcrJSIkuOCtkHLFgOfes3L1hWsZPMHHUH29/+fZy1EKjteWNadXrpa0 Y14j7YyDzLY2sYvdS//+0tvfkMSUvW6ZSet3xJTAlGhUHD65F2LGEwdiDne+GZsI 7I5ktLV2p0j2PvC1M4bPP5ejGUAFx0GwBS8a0vh5hhkOpUChXqFgZKJt1osyMJRl pavx4x8wCvSiCH/qPNTj2SnfgETWr6ICD+OKYPx0IivnO0lhC6LvIyHUYXqjMWtg ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:3tAdWqf-1wsBzpIK-_5ey7qmDjQYJxmssBIgpznjF9p2fZZkXKlslQ>
Received: from sjc-alcoop-8816.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.241.191]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 79F6C7F9A9; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:10:53 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <201710242154.v9OLsQNr050194@givry.fdupont.fr>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:10:51 -0500
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port.all@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <68965672-F23A-431D-BB71-51C15EAB7411@cooperw.in>
References: <201710242154.v9OLsQNr050194@givry.fdupont.fr>
To: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/mqS46ZLR4ReZkX-mQYRTe8qVTcE>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port-06.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 28 Nov 2017 21:11:01 -0000

Francis, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa


> On Oct 24, 2017, at 5:54 PM, 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-dhc-relay-port-06.txt
> Reviewer: Francis Dupont
> Review Date: 20171024
> IETF LC End Date: 20171024
> IESG Telechat date: unknown
> 
> Summary: Ready
> 
> Major issues: None
> 
> Minor issues: None
> 
> Nits/editorial comments: 
> - 1.1 page 3: please upgrade the 2119 section to RFC 8174
>  (it is not yet an enforced policy but it is at least strongly
>   recommended. BTW if you don't need to update the document for
>   another reason you can leave this at RFC Editor's discretion)
> 
> - 4.1 and 4.2 page 5 (5 occurrences): xxx bits value -> xxx bit value
> 
> - 6 page 7: I am afraid the logic behind this option for DHCPv6 (*)
>  is not very understable before this example. Unfortunately I both
>  know well this document and DHCP protocols so I can't say if I am
>  right and/or if it is a real problem (i.e. for the second if it can
>  be a problem for intended readers)... Perhaps not DHCP specialists
>  reading the document will help?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr
> 
> PS (*): DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 use relays for very different purposes: DHCPv4
>  relays are only for allowing out of local link servers, DHCPv6 relays
>  have other uses (this is why DHCPv6 relays can be cascaded) in particular
>  for prefix delegation (which is specific to DHCPv6) as embedded relay
>  in clients or spoofing relays (I actively pushed these two ideas :-).
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email