Re: [netext] Pete Resnick's No Objection on draft-ietf-netext-pmip-cp-up-separation-05: (with COMMENT)

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

The changes look fine. Thanks.

pr

On 8/9/14 11:54 AM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) wrote:
> Hi Pete,
>
> Thanks for the review. Please see inline.
>
>
>
> On 8/6/14 8:59 PM, "Pete Resnick"<[e-mail]>  wrote:
>
>    
>> Pete Resnick has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-netext-pmip-cp-up-separation-05: No Objection
>>
>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
>> introductory paragraph, however.)
>>
>>
>> Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>>
>>
>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netext-pmip-cp-up-separation/
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> A few weirdnesses in section 4:
>>
>>    There can be multiple
>>    instances of the LMA User Plane Address mobility option present in
>>    the message, one for IPv4 and the other for IPv6 transport.
>>
>> Do you really mean "there can be multiple instances", or do you rather
>> mean "there can be either one or two instances: One for IPv4, one for
>> IPv6, or one for each of them"?
>>      
>
> We tried to say there can be one or two instance of the option (option
> format in Section 4), one for each IP version.
>
> OLD:
>
> The LMA User Plane Address mobility option is a new mobility header
>     option defined for use with PBU and PBA messages exchanged between
>     the LMA and the MAG.  This option is used for notifying the MAG about
>     the LMA's user plane IPv6 or IPv4 address.  There can be multiple
>     instances of the LMA User Plane Address mobility option present in
>     the message, one for IPv4 and the other for IPv6 transport.
>
> NEW:
>
> The LMA User Plane Address mobility option is a new mobility header
>     option defined for use with PBU and PBA messages exchanged between
>     the LMA and the MAG.  This option is used for notifying the MAG about
>     the LMA's user plane IPv6 or IPv4 address. There can be zero, one or
> two instances of the LMA User Plane Address mobility option present in
> the message. When two instances of the option are present, one instance
> of the option must be for IPv4 transport and the other instance must be
> for IPv6 transport.
>
>
> (Or, please suggest text)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>    
>>       ...the IP address field
>>       in the option can be either a zero-length field, or...
>>
>> Two instances of the above. Should that "can" be a MUST?
>> '
>>      
>
> Yes. Thanks.
>
>
> OLD:
>
> o  When using IPv4 transport for the user-plane, the IP address field
>        in the option can be either a zero-length field, or a 4-octet
>        field with ALL_ZERO value.
>
>     o  When using IPv6 transport for the user-plane, the IP address field
>        in the option can be either a zero-length field, or a 16-octet
>        field with ALL_ZERO value.
>
>
>
> NEW:
>
> o When using IPv4 transport for the user-plane, the IP address field
> in the option MUST be either a zero-length field, or a 4-octet
> field with ALL_ZERO value.
>
> o When using IPv6 transport for the user-plane, the IP address field
> in the option MUST be either a zero-length field, or a 16-octet
> field with ALL_ZERO value.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>    
>>    ...the IP address field in the option MUST be set...
>>
>> In the above and the two bullet items below it: Shouldn't the "MUST be"
>> in each one instead be "is"? There's no protocol requirement there. What
>> else *could* an implementation do?
>>
>>      
> Ok.
>
> OLD:
>
> o  When using IPv4 transport for the user-plane, the IP address field
>        in the option MUST be the IPv4 address carrying user-plane
>        traffic.
>
>     o  When using IPv6 transport for the user-plane, the IP address field
>        in the option MUST be the IPv6 address carrying user-plane
>        traffic.
>
>
> NEW:
>
> o  When using IPv4 transport for the user-plane, the IP address field
>        in the option is the IPv4 address carrying user-plane
>        traffic.
>
>     o  When using IPv6 transport for the user-plane, the IP address field
>        in the option is the IPv6 address carrying user-plane
>        traffic.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards
> Sri
>    

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - [phone]