Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-option-11

Roni Even <roni.even@huawei.com> Mon, 09 January 2017 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <roni.even@huawei.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 2ECF2129CF2; Mon, 9 Jan 2017 06:21:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.42
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.42 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 XoU5BI07kax7; Mon, 9 Jan 2017 06:21:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13CCD129442; Mon, 9 Jan 2017 06:21:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CYM38189; Mon, 09 Jan 2017 14:21:27 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEMM401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.209) by lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.199) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Mon, 9 Jan 2017 14:21:26 +0000
Received: from DGGEMM506-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.117]) by DGGEMM401-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.3.20.209]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:21:21 +0800
From: Roni Even <roni.even@huawei.com>
To: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>, Roni Even <roni.even@mail01.huawei.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-option-11
Thread-Index: AQHSakTvcdQqqowUCUaeKEwMp0GtyKEvtzTAgAA7kWD//5kFgIAAps6g
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 14:21:20 +0000
Message-ID: <6E58094ECC8D8344914996DAD28F1CCD76BD78@DGGEMM506-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <148394474257.769.4965226716760320959.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009DE1B41@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <6E58094ECC8D8344914996DAD28F1CCD76BD21@DGGEMM506-MBX.china.huawei.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009DE1C8C@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
In-Reply-To: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009DE1C8C@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.201.118.137]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020202.58739C67.03D7, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.3.117, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 4324cda5cec8fee5399a2c11e1ba673a
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/o74LMYiHmeDt0np29MVNQW-LIdo>
Cc: "softwires@ietf.org" <softwires@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-option.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-option.all@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-option-11
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: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 14:21:33 -0000

Thanks Med,
No more comments
Roni

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
> [mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com]
> Sent: יום ב 09 ינואר 2017 14:24
> To: Roni Even; Roni Even; gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: softwires@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-
> option.all@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-option-
> 11
> 
> Re-,
> 
> Please see inline.
> 
> Cheers,
> Med
> 
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : Roni Even [mailto:roni.even@huawei.com] Envoyé : lundi 9 janvier
> > 2017 11:36 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; Roni Even; gen-
> art@ietf.org
> > Cc : softwires@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-
> > prefix-option.all@ietf.org Objet : RE: [Gen-art] Review of
> > draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-
> > option-11
> >
> > Hi Med,
> > Inline
> > Roni
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gen-art [mailto:gen-art-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> > mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
> > Sent: יום ב 09 ינואר 2017 09:43
> > To: Roni Even; gen-art@ietf.org
> > Cc: softwires@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-
> > prefix-option.all@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-
> > option-11
> >
> > Dear Roni,
> >
> > Thank you for the review.
> >
> > Please see inline.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Med
> >
> > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > De : Roni Even [mailto:roni.even@mail01.huawei.com]
> > > Envoyé : lundi 9 janvier 2017 07:52
> > > À : gen-art@ietf.org
> > > Cc : softwires@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org;
> > > draft-ietf-softwire-multicast- prefix-option.all@ietf.org Objet :
> > > Review of
> > > draft-ietf-softwire-multicast-prefix-option-11
> > >
> > > Reviewer: Roni Even
> > > Review result: Almost Ready
> > >
> > > 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-softwire-multicast-prefix-option-11
> > > Reviewer: Roni Even
> > > Review Date:2017-1-9
> > > IETF LC End Date: 2017–1-12
> > > IESG Telechat date:
> > >
> > > Summary: This draft is almost  ready for publication as a standard
> > > track RFC.
> > >
> > >
> > > Major issues:
> > >
> > > Minor issues:
> > >
> > > 1.	In section 4 first paragraph say “DHCP servers supporting
> > > OPTION_V6_PREFIX64 should be configured with U_PREFIX64 and at
> least
> > > one multicast PREFIX64 (i.e., ASM_PREFIX64 and/or SSM_PREFIX64).”
> > > From the rest of the section I understand that for SSM deployments
> > > both
> > > U_PREFIX64 and SSM_PREFIX64 MUST be configured.
> >
> > [Med] Yes. If you prefer, I can change the text to make this more clear:
> >
> > OLD:
> >   DHCP servers supporting OPTION_V6_PREFIX64 should be configured with
> >    U_PREFIX64 and at least one multicast PREFIX64 (i.e., ASM_PREFIX64
> >    and/or SSM_PREFIX64).
> >
> > NEW:
> >    DHCP servers supporting OPTION_V6_PREFIX64 must be configured with
> >    ASM_PREFIX64 or SSM_PREFIX64, and may be configured with both.
> >    U_PREFIX64 must also be configured when SSM_PREFIX64 is provided.
> >    U_PREFIX64 may be configured when only ASM_PREFIX64 is provided.
> >
> > Roni: OK
> >
> 
> [Med] I implemented the change in my local copy.
> 
> > > What is the reason for “should” in the first paragraph? Are there
> > > cases where ASM_PREFIX64 or ASM_PREFIX64 and SSM_PREFIX64 are
> > > specified and there is no need to specify U_PREFIX64, maybe these
> > > cases should be described.
> > >
> >
> > [Med] The presence of the unicast address is mandatory for the SSM
> > case because it is required to form an IPv6 address from an IPv4
> > address to subscribe to a multicast content from a particular source.
> > For the ASM case, the configuration of the U_PREFIX64 is not mandatory
> > in the following cases: (1) a local mapping algorithm is enabled by
> > the function that grafts the IPv4 multicast host side with an IPv6
> > multicast tree or
> > (2) in deployments that make use of the WKP (64:ff9b::/96, RFC6052).
> >
> > I can add this NEW text:
> >
> >    Note that U_PREFIX64 is not mandatory for the ASM case if, for
> >    example, a local address mapping algorithm is supported or the Well-
> >    Know Prefix (64:ff9b::/96) is used.
> >
> > Roni:OK
> >
> 
> [Med] I made the change in my local copy.
> 
> > >
> > > Nits/editorial comments:
> > > 1.	RFC2119 keywords in the document are sometime capitalized and
> > > sometime not. I think it will be good to have consistency and if
> > > they do not intend to have RFC2119 semantics some other words should
> > > be used
> > >
> >
> > [Med] I guess you are referring to Section 4. We are not using
> > normative language on purpose because of previous comments we
> received
> > from some DHC experts (T. Lemon). The use of normative text for the
> > server behavior would mean that we are updating RFC 3315, which we do
> > not want to do. This is why we are defining this section as configuration
> guidelines.
> >
> > Roni: maybe add to section 4 text saying that this section is not
> > normative and serves as guidelines, since this is a standard track
> > document and usage of RFC2119 keywords may be confusing
> >
> >
> [Med] Works for me. I added this NEW text to Section 4:
> 
> "This section is not normative but specifies a set of configuration guidelines."
> 
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gen-art mailing list
> > Gen-art@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art