Re: [Roll] Brian Haberman's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Wed, 30 September 2015 16:40 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@innovationslab.net>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4737F1B4774; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:40:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G64yYs0JnFZU; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:40:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C38951A7028; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:40:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach-high.fuaim.com [206.197.161.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A26F28814A; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:40:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clemson.jhuapl.edu (swifi-nat.jhuapl.edu [128.244.87.133]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8E16328081A; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
To: Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>, roll@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org
References: <20150909143959.25684.48803.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <560B72CB.5030305@toshiba.co.jp>
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
Message-ID: <560C1090.4080503@innovationslab.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:40:48 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <560B72CB.5030305@toshiba.co.jp>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4a77xgOn7tETTMx3IJbPceaPue9dCwoWv"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/xGpCGkvDZTCIw9ShmLLaGO2LBcc>
Cc: roll-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration@ietf.org, draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration.shepherd@ietf.org, maria.ines.robles@ericsson.com, draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration.ad@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Roll] Brian Haberman's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/roll/>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:40:52 -0000

These changes look good.

Regards,
Brian


On 9/30/15 1:27 AM, Yusuke DOI wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
> Thank you very much for your review!
> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> DISCUSS:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> (snip)
>> 2. In section 2.3 (MPL Forwarder Behavior), there should be a brief
>> discussion of the role of the MPL Domain Address and include a reference
>> to [I-D.ietf-roll-trickle-mcast].
> (snip)
> 
> Does the following text added on Section 2.3 looks good for you?
> 
> 
> """
> If a DHCPv6 client requests and receives the MPL Parameter
> Configuration Option, the node SHOULD join the MPL domain given by
> the option and act as an MPL forwarder.  Note that there may be cases
> in which a node may fail to join a domain (or domains) due to local
> resource constraints.  Each joining node SHOULD configure its MPL
> forwarder with the given parameter set for the MPL domain.
> <added>
> Each MPL domain is defined by an MPL Domain Address given by an MPL
> Parameter Configuration Option. As defined in Section 2 of
> [I-D.ietf-roll-trickle-mcast], an MPL Domain Address is an IPv6
> multicast address associated to a set of MPL network interfaces
> in an MPL Domain.
> </added>
> """
> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> - Why is the text in Appendix A not in the Operational Considerations
>> section?
> 
> It's my another mistake. I'll move it on next revision (already merged
> as operational consideration on my local repo)
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> // Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>
> 
> On 2015-09-09 23:39, Brian Haberman wrote:
>> Brian Haberman has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration-07: Discuss
>>
>> 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 https://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:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> DISCUSS:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Updated for -07...
>>
>> 1. Resolved
>>
>> 2. In section 2.3 (MPL Forwarder Behavior), there should be a brief
>> discussion of the role of the MPL Domain Address and include a reference
>> to [I-D.ietf-roll-trickle-mcast].
>>
>> 3. Resolved
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> - Why is the text in Appendix A not in the Operational Considerations
>> section?
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Roll mailing list
>> Roll@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>>
>