Last Call Review of draft-ietf-homenet-arch-10
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
Reviewer: Elwyn Davies
Review Date: 6 September 2013
IETF LC End Date:
IESG Telechat date: 12 September 2013
Apologies for missing the last call review of this document. I was up a
Essentially ready. A few very minor points and nits. Generally an
excellent analysis.. but it shows there is a long way to go to get a
zero config IPv6 homenet!
s2.4: Should this section mention that the border router at the
connection(s) to the homenet's ISP(s) SHOULD be set up to filter packets
with ULA source/destination addresses? (diiscussed later in para 5 of
s3.4.2 - a forward ref would help).
s3.7.3, last para: Should this mention mail services? As I have
discovered, failing to have a reverse DNS entry for a mail source can
lead to the mail being rejected. There might be other
protocols/applications that need reverse DNS also.
s3.3.4, last para: May not be possible to override policies defined by
ISP at external border.
s3.7.3, para 7: dotless domains - I'm not sure exactly whether these
will really be coming? not quite reality yet - still subject to
discussion/challenge? In any case probably need to define 'dotless
General: s/i.e./i.e.,/g, s/e.g./e.g.,/g
as well as a better
result than if the IETF had not given this specific guidance.
This sounds a little patronizing.
Perhaps something along the lines of
as well as aiming at a more consistent solution that addresses
as many of the identified requirements as possible.
s1.1: Does WPA2 need a reference?
> Depending upon circumstances beyond the scope of homenet,....
This sounds like a reference to the homenet working group which is
probably not what was meant. Maybe something like:
Depending on circumstances beyond the control of the owner of the
s3.3.2, p2: s/subdivide itself to/subdivide itself into/
s3.3.3 Can you give examples of relevant protocols?
s3.3.4: Grid network? Not sure what is meant here.
s3.4.1, p4: Expand DHCP-PD and provide ref. Also make consistent with
s3.4.3, last para.
s3.5, para 3: Uses PHY (twice) - needs expanding/explaining or use
'physical interface' as in previous sections.
s3.5, last para: s/participate the same way/participate in the same way/
s3.6: s/direct towards them./directed towards them./
s3.7.4, last para: Expand DNSSEC and give ref.
s3.7.6: CoAP needs a ref.
s3.7.8: Should devices roaming *to* the homenet be discussed?
s3.8.1: Link QoS to Quality of Service explicitly.
s3.8.1, para 2: s/drowning/overloading/ (drowning is slang).