Re: [netext] AD review of draft-ietf-netext-bulk-re-registration

[Sri Gundavelli <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jari:

Updated doc posted. Addressed all the comments from Dirk. Mostly editorial,
expect one change. Diff appears to be large, given that I touched many part
of the doc.

- Change from a 16-bit sub-type to a 8-bit value, and the use of reserved
field, in the Mobile Node Group Identifier option
- Editorial changes for consistency with some minor rewrites



Regards
Sri



On 1/3/12 12:33 AM, "Jari Arkko" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Sri:
> 
> Thanks for the update! I have reviewed the changes and they look good to me
> with one exception (below). I have in any case requested an IETF Last Call to
> be initiated and expect that you fix the remaining issues by issuing yet
> another draft quickly.
> 
> But the changes are pretty big -- it would also be useful if members of the WG
> reviewed the document while it is in the Last Call.
> 
>> o  When sending the Mobile Node Group Identifier option in the
>>   binding update messages related to the individual session
>>   establishment, the Bulk-Binding-Update (B) flag in the request
>>   MUST be set to a value of (1).  However, when initiating any
>>   binding update operations with group specific scope, the Bulk-
>>   Binding-Update (B) flag in the request MUST always be set to a
>>   value of (0), with the Mobile Node Group Identifier option present
>>   in the request.
> 
> There is something wrong with the above text. B must be set in the session
> establishment, but not with "binding update operations with group specific
> scope"? (And what are those?)
> 
> Jari
>