Last Call Review of draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-27
review-ietf-dots-data-channel-27-genart-lc-even-2019-03-07-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-dots-data-channel |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 31) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
Deadline | 2019-03-13 | |
Requested | 2019-02-27 | |
Authors | Mohamed Boucadair , Tirumaleswar Reddy.K | |
I-D last updated | 2019-03-07 | |
Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -27
by Roni Even
(diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -27 by Brian Trammell (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Roni Even |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-dots-data-channel by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 27 (document currently at 31) | |
Result | Ready w/nits | |
Completed | 2019-03-07 |
review-ietf-dots-data-channel-27-genart-lc-even-2019-03-07-00
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-dots-data-channel-?? Reviewer: Roni Even Review Date: 2019-03-07 IETF LC End Date: 2019-03-13 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: The document is ready with nits and one minor issue for publication as a standard track RFC Major issues: Minor issues: 1. In section 2 there is a discussion about conflicting filtering requests. I think that this can be considered as an attack and should be mentioned in the security section. I also think that such a conflict must be reported to the administrator even if rejected. Nits/editorial comments: 1. In figure 2 missing HTTP layer? 2. In section 6.1 "If the request is missing a mandatory attribute or its contains " should be "it" instead of "its" 3. In section 7.3 "A DOTS client periodically queries ...". I did not see any text about why this is done is this a common behavior? how often? 4. After figure 29 "bound to a given ACL as shown in Figure 28 " I think it should be 27? 5. In figure 31 ""pending-lifetime": 8000 ," why 8000 and not 9080 as in figure 28?