IETF Logo Mail Archive

[apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-6man-lineid-04

Joseph Yee <jyee@afilias.info> Sat, 02 June 2012 22:53 UTC

Return-Path: <jyee@afilias.info>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 861CF21F84D9 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Jun 2012 15:53:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.265
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B9w6QXIIT3P8 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Jun 2012 15:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outbound.afilias.info (outbound.afilias.info [69.46.124.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4F3B21F84D8 for <Apps-Discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Jun 2012 15:53:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ms6.yyz2.afilias-ops.info ([10.50.129.112] helo=smtp.afilias.info) by outbound.afilias.info with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <jyee@afilias.info>) id 1SaxCV-00070Q-4v for Apps-Discuss@ietf.org; Sat, 02 Jun 2012 22:53:39 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f178.google.com ([209.85.214.178]) by smtp.afilias.info with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jyee@afilias.info>) id 1SaxCV-0004jn-7c for Apps-Discuss@ietf.org; Sat, 02 Jun 2012 22:53:39 +0000
Received: by obceq6 with SMTP id eq6so5325193obc.9 for <Apps-Discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Jun 2012 15:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:date:subject:to :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:x-gm-message-state; bh=RbwiW9bfYGWkV3bsBbriCmuoBtsTrx+tHEvnPXVNbdU=; b=AMZ2W8j0Kr6bLp/rfJzYao2GZ3u0pa2gh5uwc2GO9LQ8BnflV4AKvjb6u7/wDyNGPb eclU7DPoTknkT/Yu6GSYZqi9b+FFikm5yzV6MUZu1G6Pv9GAAQhPT0AtSBq3cUFWYvgG ED5XlDcBnlMEsM7aCRy2re0jXouP6RsYczV9v4P1u8EFGPyYFJuPrU9GmBuNoIH3V17k DNFFu2PXMSeQgWl6xU6LsIypyWs39is5qzbAQznPrb5XWMwFBkvip0gGXWGE0fKPASo3 ZpMPva+obfzaDSK8bTrwd/NSoXRpjfmISN/PqNUD5jtY5VfPD1XVcZ+mIDQMjjFYJ405 fEqw==
Received: by 10.50.237.9 with SMTP id uy9mr4955165igc.40.1338677618677; Sat, 02 Jun 2012 15:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.108] (206-248-161-72.dsl.teksavvy.com. [206.248.161.72]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id if4sm2586321igc.10.2012.06.02.15.53.36 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 02 Jun 2012 15:53:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joseph Yee <jyee@afilias.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 18:53:35 -0400
To: Apps-Discuss@ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-lineid.all@tools.ietf.org
Message-Id: <4D0553BA-8A40-4DF0-83D4-26F7E0E77430@afilias.info>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmOeiraD6BztpNMgyTibchjn8GGAF07bJTyNFSgI03a9YALdWQMKkCrtVl1Pzk6L5bHqYd/
Subject: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-6man-lineid-04
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 22:53:44 -0000

All,

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for this draft (for background on appsdir, please see  http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate ).

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-6man-lineid-04
Title: The Line Identification Destination Option
Reviewer: Joseph Yee
Review Date: June 2, 2012


Summary: "This draft is almost ready for publication as an Experimental RFC but has a few issues that should be fixed before publication",


Major Issues: 
	none

Minor Issues: 
	section 6.2, 8th line
	"advertisement(es.  The Edge Router then forms...."
	There is no matching close bracket thru the rest of paragraph & section.  This may be a typo (nits), but I am not entirely sure, so I put it as minor.

	section 6.2, line 15
	"All BBF Access Nodes multicast address [to be allocated]..."
	Shouldn't this document define the address for IANA consideration?  If it's to be determined by WG before Last Call or to be documented (or already documented) by another RFC, please ignore.


Nits: 
	none

Note and Question
This is just my personal thought and question, it may be just my lack of knowledge in the subject matter.

If I am right, this drafts is to help making distinction at Edge Router if multiple end point or AN do not use vLAN (hence N:1).
In section 2, it says that it's experimental and not recommend for general deployment.  If it's not recommended, what's missing to make it "safe" or "good enough" for general deployment?  Is it something to do with 1:1 or vLAN environment to know how to handle ILO data first?  Would it better to document the issues in security consideration? or expand section 2 a bit more?

Regards
Joseph

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email