Re: [pim] Calling for review of draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt

[William Atwood <[e-mail]>]

Adrian, authors,

As a member of the PIM Working Group, I have read the Internet Draft
draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt.  It is very clear.  The solution is
well explained; I had no difficulty following what the authors were
trying to do.  I see no issues that would trouble the PIM WG.

I had one hiccup---I initially could not understand why there was any
reference at all to IGMP in a document describing an IPv6 mobility
protocol.  I finally came to understand when I read Section 8 more
carefully.  I believe that a simple addition to the information in
section 1 (about IGMP and MLD) will cure this.

The following are my suggestions for improvement.

Page 3, para 2.  Add a sentence at the end:  "Although the interaction
of a host in a Proxy Mobile IPv6 environment will be with MLD, there are
certain situations where IGMP may be used by the proxy.  See Section 8
for details."

(You may wish to re-word this to be more precise.  You may wish to point
out specifically in Section 8 the precise area of applicability of RFC
5844, rather than relying on the reader to read the RFC to discover
this.)  (I believe that it has something to do with the path between the
proxy and the other architectural components being confined to IPv4, but
I leave this to your expertise to find the right wording.)

Para 3, lines 7-8.  "it leads to" -> "it may lead to"  (I believe that
redundant traffic will only occur if there are two or more MNs
subscribed to the same multicast group.)

Para 4, line 1.  "former enhancements" -> "first enhancement"  ("former"
and "latter" are only used after the individual enhancements have been
named/described.  In this case, they have not yet been described, so
"former" and "latter" are inappropriate.)

Line 6.  "latter" -> "second"

Page 4, para 4, line 1.  "such" -> "the"

Para 5, line 4.  "associated to" -> "associated with"  (This change
needs to be made _throughout_ the document.)

Page 5, Section 3, para 1, line 4.  "each one" -> "each"  ("each"
implies "one"; it is not necessary to "double up" here.)

Section 3.1, para 2, line 5.  "a MLD" -> "an MLD".  (The form of the
indefinite article is based on the _sound_ of what follows.  Since "MLD"
is pronounced "em-el-dee", the initial sound is the vowel "e", so the
article is spelled "an".  In contrast, earlier in the same line, the
acronym "MAG" is pronounced "mag", and the initial sound is "m", so the
indefinite article is spelled "a".)  (This correction needs to be made
throughout the document, wherever it is wrong.)

Page 10, para 1, line 6.  "which" -> "that"  (See discussion of
which/that at the end of this email.)

Para 3, line 4.  "temporariliy" -> "temporarily"

Page 11, para 1, line 11.  "which" -> "that"

Page 16, section 8, para 1, line 7.  "i.e.  IPv6" -> "i.e., IPv6"  (Add
comma, delete space.  See discussion of "i.e." at the end of this email.)

Page 20, Appendix A.1, para 1, line 1.  "approach basically" -> "approach"

Appendix A.2, para 1, line 1.  "approach basically" -> "approach"

Line 3.  "which" -> "that"

Page 21, para 1, line 1.  "The Figure" -> "Figure"

Page 22, para 1, line 1.  "traffic which" -> "traffic, which"  (See
discussion of which/that at the end of this email.)

Line 4.  "are being served" -> "are served"

Appendix A.3, para 1, line 3.  "which" -> "that"

Appendix A.4, para 1, line 1.  "which" -> "that"

Line 5.  "The Figure" -> "Figure"

NOTE on use of "which" and "that".  "that" is used when the phrase
following it is _required_ if we are going to be able to completely
identify what is being talked about, while "which" is used to introduce
supplementary information.  Some examples:

1) If there are three houses on the street, and only one of them is at
the corner, then you say:
"The house that is on the corner needs to be painted."
2) If there are three houses on the street, and only one of them is
yellow, then you say:
"The yellow house, which needs to be painted, is for sale."

In the first case, the observer cannot identify the exact house until
its position is given.  In the second case, the house is completely
identified by its colour, and the information about the need to be
painted is supplementary information.  This information is set off with
commas, and introduced with "which".

NOTES on the use of "i.e." and "e.g.".
"i.e." is an abbreviation for "id est", a Latin phrase meaning "that
is".  As such, it should be punctuated as if it were the full phrase.
Unless there is a parenthesis on one side or the other, it is always
preceded by a comma and a space, and always followed by a comma and a space.
"e.g." is an abbreviation for "exempli gratia", a Latin phrase meaning
"for example".  It should also be punctuated as if the full phrase were
present.  Unless there is a parenthesis on one side or the other, it is
always preceded by a comma and a space, and always followed by a comma
and a space.




  Bill


On 17/07/2013 6:39 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Hi PIM working group,
> 
> Can I ask for some volunteers to look at "Multicast Mobility Routing
> Optimizations for Proxy Mobile IPv6"
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt/
> 
> This document made it through IETF last call and arrived at the IESG without
> having been shown to the PIM working group. I have deferred the document to give
> a little time for me to get your input. Please send comments to me direct or
> copying the IESG and the draft authors. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pim mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim
> 

-- 
Dr. J.W. Atwood, Eng.             tel:   [phone] x3046
Distinguished Professor Emeritus  fax:   [phone]
Department of Computer Science
   and Software Engineering
Concordia University EV 3.185     email:[e-mail]
1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West    http://users.encs.concordia.ca/~bill
Montreal, Quebec Canada H3G 1M8