Last Call Review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-04
review-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-04-genart-lc-even-2020-12-12-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 05) | |
| Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2020-12-14 | |
| Requested | 2020-11-30 | |
| Authors | Ian Farrer , Naveen Kottapalli , Martin Huněk , Richard Patterson | |
| I-D last updated | 2021-02-28 (Latest revision 2021-01-04) | |
| Completed reviews |
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -04
by Christian Huitema
(diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -04 by Roni Even (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Roni Even |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/UzzI6u2tk6rLblm1Ij6BHTFsV14 | |
| Reviewed revision | 04 (document currently at 05) | |
| Result | Ready w/nits | |
| Completed | 2020-12-12 |
review-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-04-genart-lc-even-2020-12-12-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-?? Reviewer: Roni Even Review Date: 2020-12-12 IETF LC End Date: 2020-12-14 IESG Telechat date: 2020-12-17 Summary: The document is ready for publication with nits as a standard track RFC Major issues: Minor issues: Nits/editorial comments: 1. first sentence in section 3.5 "If the client loses information about a prefix that it is delegated ..." not clear "it is" 2. section 7 "This document does not add any new security considerations beyond those mentioned in Section 22 of [RFC8213]." RFC8213 does not have section 22 , did you mean of RFC8415? 3. In section 7 are there any security requirements for the operational interface requirements from section 4.4?