Re: [netlmm] AD review of draft-ietf-netlmm-lma-discovery

jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Tue, 05 October 2010 19:13 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netlmm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78FF63A705E for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 12:13:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.62
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.021, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fzQgE2Etjmxc for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 12:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f44.google.com (mail-fx0-f44.google.com [209.85.161.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A27813A7054 for <netlmm@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 12:13:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxm6 with SMTP id 6so4675936fxm.31 for <netlmm@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 12:14:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:mime-version :content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding :message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=pFpsr2AVe2fpxPxE2ICSeRkmejWkV2lA/rTmBzPAPtk=; b=L6TSG9ZlEwYe8ZpcpMQs0JQwmPSkiLPzFAD8fl4KfpU/i9aKuzQhSUcsZvV4pjtjH2 hMWHStP3jzHr5PDsUNbIJg7IHA//3zatJpodmLlzTC+81pEvge7RPce8e/NpPV4LuGn2 gTliq31gX7GLRO4waUrmAtihzyAEKZyyuPGN4=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=vQ0BThso243eBhWal0ixh5oFXdsdGOmahvasT85RdieWqnuAiryBEWS5XcAEiyTm5z XAbfKOCsZBvfhosj+DzXVaEl2PL9AnUAsLq2j3WKDQOcXDz8OkP4lxINz8AMW5bsycSs ZjplvYMAqa9RkZ4c0QVRLRvoPgXFS4kJ+3TTg=
Received: by 10.223.122.137 with SMTP id l9mr3975295far.47.1286306064291; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 12:14:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a83-245-214-243.elisa-laajakaista.fi (a83-245-214-243.elisa-laajakaista.fi [83.245.214.243]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k15sm3122067fai.16.2010.10.05.12.14.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 05 Oct 2010 12:14:22 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4CAB0510.6060506@piuha.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 22:13:04 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0A036991-186A-4095-934E-CC7E010A4193@gmail.com>
References: <4CAB0510.6060506@piuha.net>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
Cc: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen@nsn.com>, "netlmm@ietf.org List" <netlmm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netlmm] AD review of draft-ietf-netlmm-lma-discovery
X-BeenThere: netlmm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETLMM working group discussion list <netlmm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netlmm>
List-Post: <mailto:netlmm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm>, <mailto:netlmm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 19:13:28 -0000

Hi,

Thanks for the review and progressing the document. I'll try to submit an update before the IETF#79 submission deadline. Some comments inline.

On Oct 5, 2010, at 1:59 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:

> I have reviewed this draft. I think it is good enough to move forward and I have already requested IETF Last Call to be initiated. However, I did have a couple of small comments. It would be good to address these in a new version. Feel free to submit a new version to address these issues even while the Last Call is starting. See below for the details. Finally, I did not personally see a big need to make any changes based on the discussion about RFC 5149.

OK. However, I'll reintroduce the text I had in -05 regarding the RFC 5149.


> 
>> o LMA Address from AAA during the network access authentication
>>  procedure when the MN attaches to the MAG.
>> 
>> o LMA FQDN from AAA during the network access authentication,
>>  followed by a Domain Name System (DNS) lookup.
>> 
>> o LMA FQDN derived from the MN identity received from the lower
>>  layers during the network attachment, followed by a DNS lookup.
>> 
>> o LMA FQDN or IP address received from the lower layers during the
>>  network attachment.  The reception of an FQDN from the lower
>>  layers is followed by a DNS lookup.
>> 
>> o LMA FQDN derived from the service selection indication received
>>  from lower layers during the network attachment, followed by a DNS
>>  lookup.
>>  
> 
> I would prefer to see these written as complete sentences, e.g., "LMA address is retrieved from AAA during...". And why is "Address" capitalized? Expand AAA upon first use.

Right, I will rewrite the bullets as complete sentences and expand AAA.

LMA Address with "Address" capitalized is as written in RFC5213 terminology section. 

> 
> 
>> While there can be system and architecture
>> specific details regarding the AAA interactions and the use of DNS,
>> the dynamic LMA discovery can be entirely implemented using protocols
>> and technologies developed in IETF.  Therefore, using AAA based LMA
>> discovery solutions are recommended by this document.
>>  
> 
> I don't think the argument should be that anything doable in the IETF is good. I think the better argument in this case is that AAA-based mechanisms can be access and technology agnostic, and can work in the same across heterogeneous environments.

Right.. will rephrase as:

   ...
   address or a LMA FQDN.  While there can be system and architecture
   specific details regarding the AAA interactions and the use of DNS,
   the dynamic LMA discovery can be implemented in an access and
   technology agnostic manner, and work in the same way across
   heterogeneous environments. Therefore, using AAA based LMA
   discovery solutions are recommended by this document.


From Vidya's mail the following will be changed:

draft-ietf-mipshop-pfmipv6 -> RFC 5949
RFC 4306 -> RFC 5996
RFC 5213 -> to normative references

- Jouni



> 
> Jari
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netlmm mailing list
> netlmm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm