Re: [tsvwg] Review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-natsupp

[Michael Tuexen <[e-mail]>]

> On 2. Nov 2020, at 15:34, <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Michael, 
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> I checked the changes in draft-ietf-tsvwg-natsupp-21 and I confirm that I'm happy with the changes. 
Thanks for checking and letting me know.

Best regards
Michael
> 
> Cheers,
> Med
> 
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : Michael Tuexen [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> Envoyé : lundi 2 novembre 2020 03:23
>> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN <[e-mail]>
>> Cc : Gorry Fairhurst <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
>> Objet : Re: [tsvwg] Review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-natsupp
>> 
>>> 
>>> On 29. Jul 2020, at 10:47, [e-mail] wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Gorry, all,
>>> 
>>> I support the document to advance in the publication process.
>>> 
>>> As I may not be available in the coming weeks, please find below
>> some ** minor ** comments to be considered as part of the WGLC:
>>> 
>>> * pdf: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-
>> Reviews/blob/master/draft-ietf-tsvwg-natsupp-20-rev%20Med.pdf
>> Hi Med,
>> 
>> thanks for the review. Here are the comments:
>> 
>> * Page 1: Fixed multi point -> multipoint
>> * [BMT1]: I changed internal addresses to private-use addresses.
>>          Then it is clear why RFC 6890 is cited.
>> * Page 3: added 'AFTR'.
>> * [BMT2]: Done.
>> * Page 4: Comma added.
>> * Page 4: in NAT function -> by NAT function
>> * [BMT3]: this feature -> SCTP-aware NAT
>> * Page 4: comma added
>> * [BMT4]: the extension -> SCTP-aware NAT
>> * Page 5: sent externally from behind NAT -> sent from behind NAT
>> * Page 5: feature -> SCTP-aware NAT
>> * [BMT5]: Done.
>> * [BMT6]: Done.
>> * Page 6: Internet -> Network
>> * Page 6: Basic network setup -> Basic Network Setup
>> * Page 6: multi point -> multipoint
>> * Page 7: Changes accepted.
>> * [BMT7]: Why? I consider the two NAT functions independent. So if
>> one fails, the
>>          communication can continue via the other path.
>> * Page 8: Changes accepted.
>> * [BMT8]: I don't think you gain anything from an example.
>> * [BMT9]: Done.
>> * [BMT10]: Done.
>> * [BMT11]: Done.
>> * [BMT12]: Done.
>> * [BMT13]: Done.
>> * [BMT14]: Using consistently host.
>> * Page 9:  Accepted, except figure name/number.
>> * [BMT15]: I don't think we need figure name/number.
>> * [BMT16]: Done.
>> * [BMT17]: Done.
>> * [BMT18]: Done.
>> * [BMT19]: Now using consistently host.
>> * [BMT20]: Not adding name/number to figure.
>> * [BMT21]: Not adding name/number to figure.
>> * Page 12: Changes accepted except figure name/number.
>> * Page 13: First change not accepted due to xml usage, second change
>> accepted.
>> * [BMT22]: Keeping text, since requested by WG Chair.
>> * [BMT23]: Keeping text, since requested by WG Chair.
>> * [BMT24]: Keeping text, since requested by WG Chair.
>> * [BMT25]: Keeping text, since requested by WG Chair.
>> * Page 18: Changes accepted.
>> * BMT[26]: Done.
>> * Page 19: Changes accepted.
>> * Page 20: Changes accepted.
>> * [BMT27]: I'm using 10.0.0.0/8 as a private network in accordance
>> with RFC 6890
>> * Page 33: Changes accepted.
>> * Page 40: Changes accepted.
>> 
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>>> * doc: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-
>> Reviews/raw/master/draft-ietf-tsvwg-natsupp-20-rev%20Med.docx
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Med
>>> 
>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>> De : tsvwg [mailto:[e-mail]] De la part de Gorry
>>>> Fairhurst
>>>> Envoyé : mardi 28 juillet 2020 16:53
>>>> À : Lars Eggert <[e-mail]>; Michael Tuexen <tuexen@fh-
>>>> muenster.de>
>>>> Cc : [e-mail]
>>>> Objet : Re: [tsvwg] Review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-natsupp
>>>> 
>>>> In the WG meeting today, it was suggested by the Chairs that the
>> WG
>>>> should proceed to a last LC of this document, which we plan to
>> start
>>>> this week. Thanks to all who contributed to this work over the
>> years,
>>>> and especially for the feedback over the last year that have
>> allowed
>>>> to reach this point. Please send to the list if you have
>> comments.
>>>> 
>>>> Gorry
>>>> 
>>>> On 28/07/2020 07:58, Lars Eggert wrote:
>>>>> On 2019-10-3, at 14:37, Michael Tuexen <[e-mail]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On 3. Oct 2019, at 13:35, Lars Eggert <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>>> it'll be nine years in November since the WG adopted this
>>>> document, and almost 15 years since the first drafts were
>> published.
>>>> Isn't it time to abandon this effort?
>>>>>> Or finish it? I need to address two sets of comments, which I
>> plan
>>>> to do in the next two weeks...
>>>>> Just wanted to point out that it's been almost a year since my
>> last
>>>> email and we seem no closer to finishing this.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Lars
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> 
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>