Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ippm-owamp-registry-02

"Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Fri, 11 September 2015 03:40 UTC

From: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
To: "'MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)'" <acmorton@att.com>, draft-ietf-ippm-owamp-registry.all@tools.ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
References: <03e701d0eb90$32d0d830$98728890$@gmail.com> <4AF73AA205019A4C8A1DDD32C034631D0BB4580F7F@NJFPSRVEXG0.research.att.com>
In-Reply-To: <4AF73AA205019A4C8A1DDD32C034631D0BB4580F7F@NJFPSRVEXG0.research.att.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 06:40:16 +0300
Message-ID: <048c01d0ec43$94243830$bc6ca890$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_048D_01D0EC5C.B972CFC0"
Thread-Index: AQHbc5kJGg9ilLJ+Oz7JKBHSLlsUtAI2FzOwng/umBA=
Content-Language: he
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/ouAm9qPbS7e6TmchC-Khu2B7Rs4>
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ippm-owamp-registry-02
Precedence: list

Hi Al,

OK,  I understand now.

So I have no comments.

Roni

 

From: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) [mailto:acmorton@att.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 12:32 AM
To: Roni Even; draft-ietf-ippm-owamp-registry.all@tools.ietf.org;
ietf@ietf.org
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ippm-owamp-registry-02

 

Hi Roni, see replies below,

Al

From: Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 2:16 AM
To: draft-ietf-ippm-owamp-registry.all@tools.ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org
Subject: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ippm-owamp-registry-02

 

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-ippm-owamp-registry-02

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date:2015-9-9

IETF LC End Date: 2015-9-10

IESG Telechat date: 

 

Summary: This draft is almost for publication as an Standard Track  RFC.

 

 

Major issues:

 

 

Minor issues:

 

The document registers IKEv2-derived Shared Secret Key in section 3.2.4. Why
here and not in draft-ietf-ippm-ipsec-11.  I suggest deleting the
registration of IKEv2-derived Shared Secret Key from here. Otherwise
draft-ietf-ippm-ipsec-11 should be normative reference since the [RFC TBD]
depends on it and it may cause a delay in publication and creation of the
registry.

[ACM] It's here because the IESG review of draft-ietf-ippm-ipsec spawned the
question,

"can we quickly create the needed registry for OWAMP?"  As a result of
discussion and agreement,

draft-ietf-ippm-ipsec provides all the IANA Considerations for the TWAMP
Registries, 

and this draft (which draft-ietf-ippm-ipsec is waiting for, not the other
way around)

provides all the IANA considerations to create the new OWAMP registries.

 

Nits/editorial comments:

In sections 3.1.2 and 3.2.2 the policy should be "IETF review" and not "IETF
consensus"  according to section 4.1 in RFC5226

[ACM] I see, the terminology has changed:

IETF Review - (Formerly called "IETF Consensus" in

            [IANA-CONSIDERATIONS
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226#ref-IANA-CONSIDERATIONS> ]) New values
are assigned only through

            RFCs that have been shepherded through the IESG as AD-

            Sponsored or IETF WG Documents [RFC3932
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3932> ] [RFC3978
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3978> ].

[Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ippm-ow… Roni Even
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ipp… MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ipp… Roni Even
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ipp… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ipp… Jari Arkko