Re: [Gen-art] Your Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis

["Bernie Volz (volz)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi:

Regarding:

>s21.22, 9th para after Table 36: s/The client SHOULD NOT send an IA Prefix option with 0/The client SHOULD NOT send an IAPrefix option with 0/ [space removed]

The “IA Prefix” (and IA Address) are used throughout the document. The option is code is IAPREFIX, but the name of the option “IA Prefix”.

The -13 has been published.

Thanks Elwyn for the re-review and comments!


  *   Bernie

From: Bernie Volz <[e-mail]>
Date: Friday, April 6, 2018 at 7:52 PM
To: Elwyn Davies <[e-mail]>
Cc: Suresh Krishnan <[e-mail]>, General Team <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Your Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis

I’ll update and put out a -13 over the weekend.

s20.3, para 2:
>  This method MUST be supported by all protocols.
This seems to be rather presumptious!

I’ll fix this as it is supposed to ne all Authentication option protocols.

- Bernie (from iPad)

On Apr 6, 2018, at 7:29 PM, Elwyn Davies <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi, Suresh and draft authors.

Sorry for my inaction on checking the updates.

I have now run through the changes (phew!) and think you are almost good to go. There are a couple of minor typos and a query about RFC 8213.  Otherwise, thanks for addressing most of my issues/suggestions - I am gennerally happy with the outcome.

Last few thoughts:

s18.1: s/facility/facilitate/

s19.4, next to last para: s/insert an option to/insert an option into/

s20.3, para 2:
>  This method MUST be supported by all protocols.
This seems to be rather presumptious!

s20.3, para 3: s/a message with RDM field/a message with the RDM field/

s21.22, 9th para after Table 36: s/The client SHOULD NOT send an IA Prefix option with 0/The client SHOULD NOT send an IAPrefix option with 0/ [space removed]

s20.1/s27.2:  Keeping RFC 8213 as a separate item is fair enough, but I still feel it should be normative

Cheers,
Elwyn

Sent from Samsung tablet.

-------- Original message --------
From: Suresh Krishnan <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: 06/04/2018 04:15 (GMT+00:00)
To: Elwyn Davies <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: Your Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis

Hi Elwyn,
  As I spoke to you during IETF week, the authors of draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis have addressed your review comments with text changes as well as explanations in case there are no text changes. Can you take a quick look at the latest rev to see if there are any open issues? I would like to get this draft approved by the end of this week. The latest draft is here

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-12

The issues and the changes are tracked here

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Yu6-BSV6aWPnhPGxKMPkokSaevjpfzTXe5_98ceoUMU/edit#gid=0

Thanks
Suresh