Last Call Review of draft-ietf-dots-server-discovery-11
review-ietf-dots-server-discovery-11-intdir-lc-cao-2020-10-12-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-dots-server-discovery |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 15) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Internet Area Directorate (intdir) | |
| Deadline | 2020-10-12 | |
| Requested | 2020-09-29 | |
| Requested by | Éric Vyncke | |
| Authors | Mohamed Boucadair , Tirumaleswar Reddy.K | |
| Draft last updated | 2020-10-12 | |
| Completed reviews |
Intdir Last Call review of -11
by
Zhen Cao
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -12 by Peter E. Yee (diff) Tsvart Last Call review of -11 by Kyle Rose (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -11 by Nagendra Kumar Nainar (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Zhen Cao |
| State | Partially Completed | |
| Review |
review-ietf-dots-server-discovery-11-intdir-lc-cao-2020-10-12
|
|
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/5GiCR9OOmbi_8gUzOK_8m-ibvJM | |
| Reviewed revision | 11 (document currently at 15) | |
| Result | Ready with Nits | |
| Completed | 2020-10-12 |
review-ietf-dots-server-discovery-11-intdir-lc-cao-2020-10-12-00
Reviewer: Zhen Cao Review result: Ready with Nits Thanks the authors for the document. DOTS server discovery is important to the functioning of the whole system. Important: I read Bernie's eary quick review (saying not a full one) for the 01 version [*] and the comments had been addressed in 02 version. And I think our AD @Eric needs to check if there is a need for further DHC doctor review. (although I checked there were not much changed on the DHCP parts from r02 to r11) . [*]https://github.com/boucadair/draft-ietf-dots-discovery/issues/1 I think most of the other parts looks quite ready except: a) Section 5.1.2 on the configuration of the ipv4-mapped IPv6 address. old: Note, IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses (Section 2.5.5.2 of [RFC4291]) are allowed to be included in this option. I do not know why this is particularly mentioned here given there are many types of IPv6 address. I think it 's better to remove this statement since there are many issues configuring IPv4-mapped address directly. Some systems will disable (by default) support for internal IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses. Some implementations of dual-stack do not allow IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses to be used for interoperability between IPv4 and IPv6 applications. [RFC4038]. Such discussions do not have to be present here. b) the first sentence of the abstract: s/Districuted/Distributed.