Re: [Last-Call] [homenet] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-21

Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com> Wed, 05 October 2022 06:21 UTC

Return-Path: <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6CAC15270C; Tue, 4 Oct 2022 23:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zMhwdtdcbpX4; Tue, 4 Oct 2022 23:21:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw1-x1134.google.com (mail-yw1-x1134.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1134]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DECF9C14CF12; Tue, 4 Oct 2022 23:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw1-x1134.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-358bf076f1fso85830527b3.9; Tue, 04 Oct 2022 23:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=rpyaJCwcpTDYgTMP+dXocgS1UqUJpPRmiE/1D5iahgE=; b=bH4fZUU8/2SgbgnFVl+dcyC+H+rTut/Mve+IQCpQQl+VH1rSsZYfKzYb1o8Gzw5oxJ fEiLuZVR0pnXLry96NYCDUB2c3H8hwnIm/j2WjL23WF2Hw0DqQUfYta4XIp+OrjHNIoJ NFEGw5PeBffnJT08Npp/AGWwqqfUApyz79E6V1csq/zDuni9yFi8wAuq8YuOaQvj3d/Y mcS0c4RsFC4hDp6AFcSrUfp8ZEbaO+iw4YD7JCA1slAkv8+W5ne8IG223efXoX3tMuTv 9gSpXQVNJwn8p4wc1yhd/+864gQraBgwi3HcdIeIesx6liOEwqCwMh8qocJFjKzWNsmJ zNpg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=rpyaJCwcpTDYgTMP+dXocgS1UqUJpPRmiE/1D5iahgE=; b=f61w/1zKxe63CNE1cX31Iej30yUQmtV3pAOwHTnidNUI4r3tYEFtMGh65yuDNcJJ3E jgu6CtFXuYd5I384eXkBYqhMArF3q4IoPnsezcng7O5sVF4Ic2dcTQkjUpu0KvkOeCnX DD94wyNsySvNgXPxe+qOcmSvkI8kGZPNf3ay18n1AAvq2hglrl8oxdpxQM/kVBTJYux/ LwjWUj6y3Ofi53hWbts5UMcHgMuGHqXhkKd9FWhR93mtPF5Z7mgqJTAA8Ni3M2qwdwAi tQQ4Hyi7ZWwvydO8vOVftWi1kC4yFE5du/1d3FOnZEUudI9rNDNzmpwdorxoFmjRH4II s2Dg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3S/miq7C7JbAyPNdh319H6QelDZXhTlFIWnhWctJT0ciu/ZYDY iibgLWZk5Q0l0I+1Wq1dtVpNx37xe46DTxl/F+aP5g2j
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM63ilMHq+pOK2XsER2fgdl2TUMQMDcEv2bJ3M9E81t9BqkO/rNJ1WaP8YWmoCQ5HXIFn6sW5HNLnkmBigACu3E=
X-Received: by 2002:a81:6355:0:b0:349:ec95:9b4f with SMTP id x82-20020a816355000000b00349ec959b4fmr28380393ywb.117.1664950878916; Tue, 04 Oct 2022 23:21:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <166490264150.57570.18253706725814799436@ietfa.amsl.com> <CADZyTk==vAcc2DMzZzktDhMads9S_fCUxeXTPNEXNBAp7_3xUg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADZyTk==vAcc2DMzZzktDhMads9S_fCUxeXTPNEXNBAp7_3xUg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2022 09:20:42 +0300
Message-ID: <CAP+sJUcbGKRyXQ2A9UJnUzrqhbfG_5w4Zzg3ZmVC0GJu09id=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: "gen-art >> General area reviewing team" <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options.all@ietf.org, homenet <homenet@ietf.org>, last-call@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b4d60205ea43955b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/HtV72D4KJCA-B3I5ihQk_OcI3XI>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] [homenet] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-21
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2022 06:21:27 -0000

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for addressing my comments. I agree with your suggestions.

BR,
Ines.

On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 5:01 AM Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Ines,
>
> Thanks for the reviews. We can of course include 7227 and I added the
> reference as follows:
>
> This section details the payload of the DHCPv6 options following the
> guidelines of {
> {?RFC7227}}.
>
> Regarding your second comment, I think what we meant is that the trust
> associated with the information obtained via the DHCP option described in
> this document is similar to the trust associated with the IP prefix. I
> think the texte might be clearer saying:
>
> OLD:
> The use of DHCPv6 options provides a similar level of trust as
> the one used to provide the IP prefix
>
> NEW:
> The trust associated with the information carried by the DHCPv6 Options
> described in this document is similar to the one associated with the IP
> prefix - when configured via DHCPv6.
>
> The changes can be seen on github:
>
> https://github.com/ietf-homenet-wg/front-end-naming-delegation-dhc-options/blob/master/draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options.md
>
> Yours,
> Daniel
>
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 12:58 PM Ines Robles via Datatracker <
> noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>
>> Reviewer: Ines Robles
>> Review result: Ready with Nits
>>
>> 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 treat these comments just
>> like any other last call comments.
>>
>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>>
>> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>>
>> Document: draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-??
>> Reviewer: Ines Robles
>> Review Date: 2022-10-04
>> IETF LC End Date: 2022-10-04
>> IESG Telechat date: 2022-10-20
>>
>> Summary:
>>
>> This document defines DHCPv6 options so an Homenet Naming Authority (HNA)
>> can
>> automatically proceed to the appropriate configuration and outsource the
>> authoritative naming service for the home network.
>>
>> The document is well written and easy to understand.
>>
>> I have two minor questions as nits.
>>
>> Major issues: None
>> Minor issues: None
>> Nits/editorial comments/Questions:
>>
>> 1- Have you consider in this document RFC 7227- Guidelines for Creating
>> New
>> DHCPv6 Options -? If yes, should it be added in the references? If not,
>> why
>> not? 2- Page 9: "The use of DHCPv6 options provides a similar level of
>> trust as
>> the one used to provide the IP prefix." In which features are similar? In
>> which
>> features are dissimilar?
>>
>> Thanks for this document,
>>
>> Ines.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> homenet mailing list
>> homenet@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Migault
> Ericsson
>