Re: [Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension-09
"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Thu, 12 May 2016 18:04 UTC
Return-Path: <volz@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEC5512D0F4 for <int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 May 2016 11:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.517
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.517 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=-0.996, 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 giS4Ek0zlBST for <int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 May 2016 11:04:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 854CF12D0EE for <int-dir@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 May 2016 11:04:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3411; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1463076293; x=1464285893; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=sxDG+pi6YlLsQ+a1qyONq198shUrS0uX9IwaottlLzg=; b=g2PkIYNJ46zgdzY8GMxoEq7pNsbmw7wb/GepqYiAM21aqUm01gH5yBXO Ssm4O88l6CrsKKTbj4OzMrPi5BC3Lvbc/31aejjIKuJf4fOCxM3mE/2PN Vyuu0RmIO91gh/URmzXoKPTm60GCJOr7NCi2MauFb7FOlbFrXef2eg6IT w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D2AQDtxDRX/4QNJK1egzhVfga5WQENgXYXC4VyAoE5OBQBAQEBAQEBZSeEQgEBAQQBAQE3NBcGAQgRBAEBHwkuCxQJCQEEARIIAYgmDr0KAQEBAQEBAQMBAQEBAQEBAQEeinGCEIJhhScFmCcBjhaPII9AAR4BAUKDa24BhzF/AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,610,1454976000"; d="scan'208";a="101576016"
Received: from alln-core-10.cisco.com ([173.36.13.132]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 12 May 2016 18:04:52 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by alln-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u4CI4qd6000584 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 12 May 2016 18:04:52 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 12 May 2016 13:04:52 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-003.cisco.com ([173.36.7.13]) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com ([173.36.7.13]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 12 May 2016 13:04:52 -0500
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: "jouni.nospam@gmail.com" <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>, "<int-dir@ietf.org>" <int-dir@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension.all@tools.ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension-09
Thread-Index: AdGseLNJ4BpCqwdIQ7mT+6xT/rcwxA==
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 18:04:51 +0000
Message-ID: <0828080abc414404a0c89e36e0012d7b@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.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: [10.131.76.130]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/wvuyJxBJ7BTH1lisx2ucvjRE7eI>
Subject: Re: [Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension-09
X-BeenThere: int-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This list is for discussion between the members of the Internet Area directorate." <int-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-dir>, <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-dir/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-dir>, <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 18:04:56 -0000
Thanks much Jouni! (And seems to be in agreement with Ralph's and my assessment.) - Bernie -----Original Message----- From: Int-dir [mailto:int-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jouni Korhonen Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 1:15 PM To: <int-dir@ietf.org> <int-dir@ietf.org>; draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension.all@tools.ietf.org Subject: [Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension-09 I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-mif-happy-eyeballs-extension-09. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more details on the INT Directorate, see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate.html. I recon the review is way late but I am doing it still. * The document is not ready for publication. The first issues that comes out is the language and grammar, which needs a major facelift. In many places the reader is left wondering what exactly was meant on the first few reads. The second issue really is the technical recommendations how to implement HE-MIF enabled device. I cannot say Section 5 describes the behaviour well enough for me to be able to implement anything (I do realize this is an Informational document but still..). Furthermore, Section 6 implementation framework description is somewhat thin. * Some acronyms such as MIF and PVD are never expanded while some are multiple times (like HE). * The document uses "fast interface" and "most fast path".. Does it mean fast by link bandwidth or actually the smallest connection RTT? All references to "fast" should be revisited and clarified what is actually meant. * HE-MIF is described as adopting happy eyeballs to MPVD. After reading the document this connection is somewhat vague. The document should be a bit more concrete on how to apply MPVD specifically to happy eyeballs. * Use case WiFi is broken: 121 might not be the case for several reasons, such as authentication 122 requirements, instability at layer 2, or even, perhaps, the WiFi It is unclear to me how "authentication requirements" applies here. Does it actually try to mean captive portal type scenario? Also, it is unclear to me how "instability at layer 2" applies here. Does it mean the connection is so bad that no packets go through? In that case it is likely the device would not be able to acquire or keep its IP address either on that interface. * WiFi use case makes a sudden assumption the device is a mobile phone. While this is probably the case the use case description starts off with "MIF node".. recommend using something like "MIF enabled mobile device". * I do not understand what the "time slot" means here: 127 to wait an appropriate time slot but not forever. After the timer is * No Reference to ANDSF.. most readers are linkely unfamiliar with it. * Sections 5 should really be more concrete with its guidance to implementers what to do. - Jouni _______________________________________________ Int-dir mailing list Int-dir@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-dir
- Re: [Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-mif-ha… GangChen
- [Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-mif-happy-… Jouni Korhonen
- Re: [Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-mif-ha… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-mif-ha… GangChen