Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

You suggestions look good, and I am happy with your reply :)

Regards,

Christer

-----Original Message-----
From: kkinnear [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: 02 February 2017 01:07
To: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>
Cc: Kim Kinnear <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04

Christer,

I have deleted the issues not under discussion.

More comments, indented, below...

> On Feb 1, 2017, at 5:57 PM, Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> 
>>> Q3:        In the Introduction, I suggest adding a reference to the first occurrences of “DHCP service” and “DHCP server”.
>> 
>> 	While I'm more than happy to do this, I don't actually know
>> 	what you would like me to reference?  We haven't defined
>> 	either "DHCP service" or "DHCP server" in the glossary since
>> 	we felt they were reasonably apparent from the context of this
>> 	document.  Are you thinking that we should reference RFC3315
>> 	on the first occurrence of "DHCP service" and "DHCP server"?
> 
> Yes.

	Ok, I will do so in the next update.
> 
>>> SECTION 4:
>>> 
>>> Q5:        In the Abstract and Introduction it is said that DHCPv6 does not provide server redundancy. Then section 4 talks about failover concepts and mechanism.
>>> 
>>> Are those concepts something used for DHCPv6 today, but for some reason do not fulfil the failover protocol requirements?
>>> 
>>> OR, are these general concepts that will be supported by implementing the failover protocol?
>>> 
>>> I think it would be good to have an introduction statement clarifying that.
>> 
>> 	The concepts and mechanisms discussed in Section 4 relate to
>> 	the failover protocol, they aren't present in the regular
>> 	RFC3315(et. al.) DHCPv6 protocol.  I will add the following to
>> 	Section 4 to clarify that:
>> 
>> 	"4.  Failover Concepts and Mechanisms
>> 
>> 	The following concepts and mechanisms are necessary to the operation
>> 	of the failover protocol, and they are not currently employed by
>> 	the DHCPv6 protocol [RFC3315].
> 
> That's better. But, will the failover protocol provide support for those concepts? If so, please indicate it.
> 

	How about this:

	"4.  Failover Concepts and Mechanisms

	The following concepts and mechanisms are necessary to the operation
	of the failover protocol, and they are not currently employed by
	the DHCPv6 protocol [RFC3315].  The failover protocol provides
        support for all of these concepts and mechanisms.

	..."

Thanks -- Kim