RE: Review of draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-08

"Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com> Wed, 17 August 2016 15:24 UTC

Return-Path: <tireddy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C66AD12E029; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:24:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.768
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.768 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 8He7ugBrrx8M; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:24:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1239412E026; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:24:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4618; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1471447461; x=1472657061; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=OXga+boF5DKM02oUaIQ5che8xLNJkEFzStQJu1NYpcM=; b=f26EqyxKKR0lAvOpADWckgWtxByQ/4a+h2udRlqqHSdQRbAQ2Wv6m/eR tPB/zOAYZCsXoYTuwAUjJ109tYAZHsCTzh62Dbp+Vhj59I7VVGaV5dHdH QKOHpCXUV1F+fqKYmbebJSFTxawc2YdcWL6w/tEDvI28z3D7FNp7fToaB U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ApAgCBgLRX/5tdJa1eg0RWfAetBIwsg?= =?us-ascii?q?X0mhXcCgWg4FAIBAQEBAQEBXieEXgEBBAE6LRIFBwQCAQgOAwMBAQEfCQchERQ?= =?us-ascii?q?JCAIEAQ0FCAGIDgMPCA65MA2EFwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARyGKoRNg?= =?us-ascii?q?kOBYAEBBYVxBY4dhWCFEzQBhh+GO4I8gXJOhA6JAogzhAiDdwEeNoN6bgGFPTd?= =?us-ascii?q?/AQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,529,1464652800"; d="scan'208";a="311142148"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Aug 2016 15:24:20 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-017.cisco.com (xch-aln-017.cisco.com [173.36.7.27]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u7HFOJ9n024264 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:24:20 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-017.cisco.com (173.37.102.27) by XCH-ALN-017.cisco.com (173.36.7.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:24:19 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-017.cisco.com ([173.37.102.27]) by XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com ([173.37.102.27]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:24:19 -0500
From: "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com>
To: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>, "Review Area gen-art@ietf.org Team" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-08
Thread-Topic: Review of draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-08
Thread-Index: AQHR8oVKfQIfH+cg20y9OerS02OxwKBNCDGA
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:24:19 +0000
Message-ID: <89c07464407c404ea8543bcb3c3dc88e@XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com>
References: <7194DC7F-E802-42B2-AA6C-94D02167D89D@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7194DC7F-E802-42B2-AA6C-94D02167D89D@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.65.71.234]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/VQr1J_SnAzF6k-LciFK6PUXqrBI>
Cc: "draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery.all@ietf.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:24:23 -0000

Hi Ralph,

Thanks for the review. Please see inline.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Droms [mailto:rdroms.ietf@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 2:58 AM
> To: Review Area gen-art@ietf.org Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
> Cc: draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery.all@ietf.org; IETF discussion list
> <ietf@ietf.org>
> Subject: Review of draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-08
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review
> Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for
> the IETF Chair. Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call
> comments you may receive.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-08
> Reviewer: Ralph Droms
> Review Date: 2016-08-09
> IETF LC End Date: 2016-08-11
> IESG Telechat date: unknown
> 
> 
> Summary:
> 
> This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review.
> 
> The draft is well-written and appears to be ready for publication, except as
> noted below.
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> Section 5, DNS Service Discovery, includes more details about DNS Service
> Discovery (DNS-SD) than is necessary for this specification.
> While it can be useful to repeat some specific details of another specification
> for, there is a danger in writing too many details that may not be entirely in
> agreement with the published specification.  In the case of this document, I
> suggest that section 5 be rewritten to just refer to DNS Service discovery, with
> a minimum of explanation.
> The example is useful ... although I think some of the details in the example
> ought to be changed.  The use of DNS-SD over unicast DNS and multicast DNS
> can be mentioned in a sentence somewhere in section 5, as the use of DNS-SD
> is otherwise identical.  I would leave out section 5.1 altogether.
> 
> Looking at the IANA "Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number
> Registry"
> <www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-
> port-numbers.xhtml>,
> I see that TURN is registered as using service name "turn", rather than
> "turnserver" as in the example.  Also in the example, the instance name
> "example.com" might be problematic, as the instance is usually just a single
> label.  In fact, I interpret the text in the document to describe the instance
> name as a single label.  It might be worth experimenting to see how DNS-SD
> libraries deal with a label like "example.com", or perhaps simply change
> instance in the example to something like "exampleco TURN Server"

Changed to "exampleco TURN Server" and used service names "turn" and "turns".

> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> Section 5 mentions the use of a TXT record to carry additional information
> about the TURN service instance.  Are there any conventions for the
> name/value pairs carried in the TXT record? 

No conventions.

>  If not, I think there should be a
> note that any name/value pairs in the TXT record are left to local definition.

Okay, added following line:
The TXT record can contain any key/value pairs left to the local definition.

> 
> Editorial issues:
> 
> I suggest using the example.com domain rather than local in the example for
> clarity.  Perhaps also change the intro sentence for the example:
> 
> OLD:
>  For example, TURN server advertises the following DNS records :
> NEW:
>  For example, the following DNS records would be used for a TURN server with
> instance name "exampleco TURN Server" providing TURN service over UDP on
> port 5030:

Updated.

> 
> 
> It would help readability if the columns in the DNS records in the example
> could be lined up; something like (apologies if your mail reader changes the
> column alignments and if I don't have the quoting right):
> 
> _turnserver._udp.local.
> PTR	"exampleco TURN Server"._turn._udp.local.
> 
> "exampleco TURN Server"._turn._udp.local.
> SRV	0 0 5030 example-turn-server.local.
> 
> example-turn-server.local.
> A	198.51.100.2
> 
> example-turn-server.local.
> AAAA	2001:db8:8:4::2
> 
> Similarly, it would help readability if the list of DNS records for S-NAPTR
> resolution were formatted in aligned columns.

Fixed.

> 
> In section 3, does "on top of" mean "in addition to" or "instead of"?

It means "in addition to".

-Tiru