Re: [Gen-art] Review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-05

[tianxiang li <[e-mail]>]

Hi Roni,

Thank you for comments, we'll add the changes to the document in our next
updated version.
Please see inline.

Cheers,
Tianxiang

2017-02-02 14:42 GMT+08:00 Roni Even <[e-mail]>:

> Hi,
>
> I will leave only the items that needed my response
>
>
>
> 7.      In section 3.4 “If the client decided to use  the prefix provided
> by the server despite being longer than the  prefix-length hint” yet I
> did not see in section 3.2 that the server can provide a longer
> prefix.
>
>
>
> [Tianxiang] This was mentioned in the last sentence of section 3.2:
>
>
>
> "If the requested prefix is not available in the server's prefix pool, and
> the client also included a prefix-length hint in the same IA_PD option,
> then the server SHOULD try to provide a prefix matching the prefix-length
> value, or the prefix with the shortest length possible which is closest to
> the prefix-length hint value."
>
> *[Roni Even] I understood from 3.2 that it should provide a shorter length
> prefix  closer to the request maybe “*or the prefix with the closest
> possible length to the prefix-length hint value”
>
>
>
> [Tianxiang2] The original sentence was a bit confusing, perhaps we could
> change it like this:
>
>
>
> OLD: "If the requested prefix is not available in the server's prefix
> pool, and the client also included a prefix-length hint in the same IA_PD
> option, then the server SHOULD try to provide a prefix matching the
> prefix-length value, or the prefix with the shortest length possible which
> is closest to the prefix-length hint value."
>
>
>
> NEW:"If the requested prefix is not available in the server's prefix pool,
> and the client also included a prefix-length hint in the same IA_PD option,
> then the server SHOULD provide a prefix matching the prefix-length hint, or
> a prefix which is length is shorter and as close as possible to the
> prefix-length hint. If the server could not provide a prefix which length
> is shorter or equal to the prefix-length hint, the server SHOULD provide
> the prefix which length is longer and as close as possible to the
> prefix-length hint."
>
>
>
> *[Roni Even] I have no problem with this text since it will also work with
> the rest of the document but is it what was really meant*
>
>
>
[Tianxiang3] This was the intended meaning of the original sentence, if the
server could not honor the hint, it should provide a prefix closest to the
hint, the client could then decide whether to accept or neglect this prefix.


> *Also a nit*
>
>
>
> “or a prefix which is length is shorter and as close as possible to the
> prefix-length hint. If the server could not provide a prefix which length
> is shorter or equal to the prefix-length hint, the server SHOULD provide
> the prefix which length is longer and as close as possible to the
> prefix-length hint”
>
>
>
> to
>
>
>
> “or a prefix whose length is shorter and as close as possible to the
> prefix-length hint. If the server could not provide a prefix with a shorter
> or equal length  to the prefix-length hint, the server SHOULD provide a
> prefix whose length is longer and as close as possible to the prefix-length
> hint”
>

[Tianxiang3] Thanks for the suggestion, we will edit this sentence
accordingly.

>
>
>
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
>
>
>
>