Re:[Softwires] Tsvart last call review ofdraft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-22

Dear Joe,

Thank you very much for your comments, the following is the response, 

> The doc does the right thing by not trying to describe a solution

> itself. However, it cites RFC 5565, which cites RFC4459. That's where

> the only trouble lies - 4459 is incorrect, as noted in

> draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels. I might suggest they continue to cite RFC

> 5565 but indicate that the requirements for tunneling are under current

> revision and cite draft-ietf-intarea-tunnel (at least informationally) too.

> It might also be important to discuss the challenge of tunnel

> configuration in a multicast environment, which is addressed as well in

> draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels.

> - other issues:

> 7.2 correctly notes that the TTL should be set per tunneling policy, but

> gives no advice as to how that is done (again, a pointer to

> draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels would be useful)

Thank you for your useful advices, we add draft-ietf-intarea-tunnel  as a reference

for fragment technology and ttl configuration. 

We have uploaded a new version: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-23

Best Regards,

Shu Yang

------------------

杨术

欧德蒙科技有限公司

This message may contain privileged and confidential information only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any use, distribution or reproduction of this message is prohibited. If you have received this message in error please notify the sender immediately. 

------------------ Original ------------------
From:  "Joseph Touch"<touch@strayalpha.com>;
Date:  Wed, Sep 5, 2018 12:37 PM
To:  "tsv-art"<tsv-art@ietf.org>; 
Cc:  "softwires"<softwires@ietf.org>; "ietf"<ietf@ietf.org>; "draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast.all"<draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast.all@ietf.org>; 
Subject:  [Softwires] Tsvart last call review ofdraft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-22

Reviewer: Joseph Touch
Review result: Ready with Issues

Hi, all,

I’ve prepared this review the request of Magnus Westerlund, who is preparing a
TSVART review. My comments focus on the issue of fragmentation and tunneling.

These are relatively minor issues that are simple to address, but not quite
what I would consider nits.

Joe

------

-- Regarding fragmentation:

The doc does the right thing by not trying to describe a solution
itself. However, it cites RFC 5565, which cites RFC4459. That's where
the only trouble lies - 4459 is incorrect, as noted in
draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels. I might suggest they continue to cite RFC
5565 but indicate that the requirements for tunneling are under current
revision and cite draft-ietf-intarea-tunnel (at least informationally) too.

It might also be important to discuss the challenge of tunnel
configuration in a multicast environment, which is addressed as well in
draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels.

- other issues:

7.2 correctly notes that the TTL should be set per tunneling policy, but
gives no advice as to how that is done (again, a pointer to
draft-ietf-intarea-tunnels would be useful)

------

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
Softwires@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires