Re: 6MAN WG Adoption call : draft-jeong-6man-rdnss-rfc6106-bis

["Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Bob and Ole,
I believe we address all of the comments for IPv6 DNS RA Options draft.
Could you go ahead of WGLC?

BTW, I have updated the draft with the affiliation and address of Soohong
Daniel Park.

The draft is:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-rdnss-rfc6106bis-05

Thanks.

Paul


On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> David,
> I have reflected all of your comments on the revision.
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-rdnss-rfc6106bis-04
>
> Thanks.
>
> Paul
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:34 PM, David Farmer <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> On 10/5/15 05:30 , Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong wrote:
>>
>>> Hi 6MAN WG,
>>> Here is the revised draft reflecting the discussion of link-local
>>> addresses
>>> for recursive DNS servers:
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-rdnss-rfc6106bis-03
>>>
>>> The major changes are as follows:
>>>
>> ...
>>
>> Those changes all look good to me.  However, I have a few more issues;
>>
>> 1. The first paragraph of the Introduction says the following;
>>
>>    The purpose of this document is to standardize an IPv6 Router
>>    Advertisement (RA) option for DNS Recursive Server Addresses used for
>>    the DNS name resolution in IPv6 hosts.  This RA option was specified
>>    in an earlier Experimental specification [RFC5006].  This document is
>>    also to define a new RA option for Domain Name Search Lists for an
>>    enhanced DNS configuration.  Thus, this document obsoletes [RFC5006],
>>    which only defines the RA option for DNS Recursive Server Addresses.
>>
>> The last two sentences of this paragraph probably need to be rewritten
>> consistent with the changes already made to the Abstract .  Here is some
>> possible text, use it if you like;
>>
>>    The purpose of this document is to standardize an IPv6 Router
>>    Advertisement (RA) option for DNS Recursive Server Addresses used for
>>    the DNS name resolution in IPv6 hosts.  This RA option was originally
>>    specified in an earlier Experimental specification [RFC5006].  This
>>    document obsoletes [RFC6106], allowing a higher default value of the
>>    lifetime of the RA DNS options to avoid the frequent expiry of the
>>    options on links with a relatively high rate of packet loss, and
>>    additional clarifications, see Appendix B for details.
>>
>> 2. I'd like to see the Security Considerations section updated with an
>> Informational reference regarding "rogue Router Advertisements" [RFC6104].
>>
>> 3. I think the IANA Considerations section should be updated to request
>> the references for these options to be updated to point at this document.
>>
>>
>> http://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters/icmpv6-parameters.xhtml#icmpv6-parameters-5
>>
>> 4.  The Acknowledgements section is the text originally in RFC6106.  I'm
>> assuming this is just an oversight, as I believe several people have made
>> comments worthy of acknowledgement for the new document.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --
>> ================================================
>> David Farmer               Email: [e-mail]
>> Office of Information Technology
>> University of Minnesota
>> 2218 University Ave SE     Phone: [phone]
>> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029  Cell: 1-612-812-9952
>> ================================================
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ===========================
> Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Software
> Sungkyunkwan University
> Office: [phone]
> Email: [e-mail], [e-mail]
> Personal Homepage: http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php
>



-- 
===========================
Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: [phone]
Email: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Personal Homepage: http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php