Re: [Softwires] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Tue, 23 August 2016 07:47 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8996E12D758; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:47:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.167
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.167 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 YBcI8-w9nuAe; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:47:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (relais-nor34.orange.com [80.12.70.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DE18120727; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 00:47:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfednr06.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.70]) by opfednr24.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 9758640372; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 09:47:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.17]) by opfednr06.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 6A90A1A0077; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 09:47:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM24.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::a1e6:3e6a:1f68:5f7e%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 09:47:16 +0200
From: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
To: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>, "rtg-ads@ietf.org" <rtg-ads@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04
Thread-Index: AQHR99IP44VBggTHYkafwrQKlpk/c6BWJ39Q
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 07:47:15 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933008E084F0@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <DB94397E-CC5E-4A21-8823-C489424DEECD@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <DB94397E-CC5E-4A21-8823-C489424DEECD@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.5]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/softwires/g1SwzrwdhZoQr5rmRbRM5I-7D0Y>
Cc: "draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe@ietf.org>, "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, "softwires@ietf.org" <softwires@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/softwires/>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 07:47:19 -0000

Dear John,

Thank you for the review. 

Please see inline.

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : John Scudder [mailto:jgs@juniper.net]
> Envoyé : mardi 16 août 2016 17:22
> À : rtg-ads@ietf.org
> Cc : rtg-dir@ietf.org; draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe@ietf.org;
> softwires@ietf.org
> Objet : RtgDir review: draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft.
> The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related
> drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes
> on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to
> the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate,
> please see ​http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
> 
> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it
> would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last
> Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through
> discussion or by updating the draft.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04
> Reviewer: John Scudder
> Review Date:  August 16, 2016
> IETF LC End Date:  August 25, 2016
> Intended Status: Standards Track
> 
> Summary:
> 
> 	• This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that
> should be considered prior to publication.
> 
> 
> Comments:
> 
> The draft is well-written, clear, readable and concise without being
> terse. As a nonexpert, I felt it provided sufficient explanation and
> context for me to understand without having to spend a great deal of time
> chasing references.
> 
[Med] Thank you.

> 
> Major Issues:
> 
> No major issues found.
> 
> 
> Minor Issues:
> 
> Section 1.3 says:
> 
>    4.  When a match is found, the client SHOULD configure the resulting
>        S46 mechanism.  Configuration for other S46 mechanisms MUST be
>        discarded.
> 
> It was not obvious to me why the SHOULD is not a MUST. Under what
> circumstances would it be valid for an implementer to disregard the
> SHOULD? I find it is often a helpful exercise to explain such exceptions
> in a MAY clause. If there are no exceptions, then it's a MUST.
> 

[Med] It seems that you have a point here.

> 
> Nits:
> 
> -  You use the term "BR/AFTR" but don't define what BR means. A definition
> would help. (AFTR is defined in section 1.)
> 
[Med] Fixed.

> -  Likewise you haven't defined "CE". It's a pretty common term, but I
> would think it still needs a definition, or better still you could rewrite
> to remove the acronym (you only use it once).

[Med] Fixed.

> 
> - Likewise "DHCPv6 ORO message". It's reasonably obvious from context, and
> not difficult to look up, but would still benefit from being expanded in
> line instead of using the acronym.

[Med] Fixed.