Re: [multimob] Review of draft-ietf-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast-02

Thanks Behcet,

for enjoying the Superball. Who won?

Regarding the draft, we will provide an update soon that will include 
previous feedback from the WG, as well.

What we already can say right now:

  We won't rip the draft into pieces and turn it into a fragment, as you 
please to suggest. Content, coverage and scope of this draft has been 
under intense discussion since 2010 with two ADs (Jari and Brian) 
involved. The last clear roadmap on the subject was given by Brian in 
the Berlin meeting.

Behcet, every document we have worked out, you tried to destroy at the 
very last minute.

  * For RFC 6224 you requested changes to make it technically completely 
wrong.

  * You requested to garble the source draft a couple weeks ago.

  * Now you ask for ripping apart the *fmipv6 protocol systematic.

I don't know why you're doing this ... but it's always against the 
quality of the documents, against the IETF consensus policy ... and it's 
always completely useless.

So let's just forget this part of your Superball-Review.

Cheers,

Thomas

On 03.02.2014 00:39, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I finished my review while watching Superball 2014 :-), here it is:
>
> - remove MIPv6 from the title
>
> Sec. 2
> In addition, the following terms are
>     introduced:
>     where are the terms?
>
> Sec. 3.1
> subnet link
>     use on of them
>
> when the group is
>     natively received.
>     What does this mean, please explain
>
> As group membership information are
>     s/are/is
>
> Sec. 3.2
>    FMIPv6 coverage is out of scope as it applies to MIPv6, so remove
> this section
>    Other sections may need adjustment based on this
> Sec. 4.1.1
>    As FMIPv6 is out of scope, this section needs to be rewritten to
> cover PFMIPv6 (if any)
> Section 5
>    Here you may add one sentence saying that these structures can apply
> to MIPv6?
> Sec. 5.3
>    The size of this option in 8 octets
>    s/in/is
>
> Last but not least, I think the draft finishes without a discussion of
> why this solution is needed. We need some text on this. I don't know if
> the reference "FMIPv6-Analysis" could be useful.
>
> Regards,
>
> Behcet
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> multimob mailing list
> multimob@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multimob
>

-- 

Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt
° Hamburg University of Applied Sciences                   Berliner Tor 7 °
° Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group    20099 Hamburg, Germany °
° http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet                   Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 °
° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt    Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 °