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

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Tue, 05 October 2010 10:58 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 1E3713A6F2C for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 03:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.437
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.162, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 oppSEz2ZN6ML for <netlmm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 03:58:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11C093A6F22 for <netlmm@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 03:58:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A91142CC49; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 13:59:29 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ta8JMt5L8eEm; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 13:59:29 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34F9F2CC3C; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 13:59:29 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <4CAB0510.6060506@piuha.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 13:59:28 +0300
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100411)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "netlmm@ietf.org" <netlmm@ietf.org>, "jouni.korhonen@nsn.com" <jouni.korhonen@nsn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [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 10:58:35 -0000

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.

> 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.


> 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.

Jari