IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-lisp-interworking-03.txt

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Fri, 17 February 2012 08:55 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 32A3221F88B0 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 00:55:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.559
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yUKZffr18NPA for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 00:55:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26EE521F8898 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 00:55:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 293752D35A; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:55:30 +0200 (EET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f1bvxJ4dClkc; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:55:25 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798D72CC3C; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:55:25 +0200 (EET)
Message-ID: <4F3E15FC.80304@piuha.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:55:24 +0200
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20120129 Thunderbird/10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Miguel A. Garcia" <Miguel.A.Garcia@ericsson.com>
References: <4F3E124F.40603@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F3E124F.40603@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: darlewis@cisco.com, vaf@cisco.com, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, dmm@cisco.com, dino@cisco.com, terry.manderson@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-lisp-interworking-03.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 08:55:33 -0000

Thanks for your review!

Jari

On 17.02.2012 10:39, Miguel A. Garcia wrote:
> I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (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 comments you may receive.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-lisp-interworking-03.txt
> Reviewer: Miguel Garcia <miguel.a.garcia@ericsson.com>
> Review Date: 2012-02-17
> IETF LC End Date: 2012-02-23
> IESG Telechat date: 2012-03-01
>
> Summary: The document is ready for publication as an experimental RCFc.
>
> Major issues: none
>
> Minor issues: none
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> - Section 5.2 describes a sequence of packet flows. I think it would be easier to understand if there is a companion figure to which the text can refer to. Otherwise, the reader has to compose this figure in his mind.
>
> - Please expand acronyms at first occurrence. This includes: RLOC, CRIO
>
> - Perhaps the terminology section should include RLOC, xTR, ETR, ITR, DFZ
>
> - Idnits reveals a number of unused references: LIPS-MS, RFC4632, LISP-DEPLOY, RFC4787, RFC5382. They should be deleted.
>
> - Idnits reveals an obsolete reference: RFC 2434 (Obsoleted by RFC 5226)
>
> - Idnits reveals a number of instances where IP addresses are not compliant with RFC 5735. I am trying to identify which ones of these are. I guess they are the 220.x.x.x, 128.x.x.x EIDs. I think most of them are technically EIDs for LISP-NR, LISP-R LISP-NAT, etc. I don't know if RFC 5735 applies to this draft or not, I am just letting you know in case you need to fix something.
>
> BR,
>
>      Miguel
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email