Last Call Review of draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt-06
review-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt-06-genart-lc-melnikov-2013-07-03-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 08) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
Deadline | 2013-07-03 | |
Requested | 2013-06-20 | |
Authors | Juan-Carlos Zúñiga , Luis M. Contreras , Carlos J. Bernardos , Seil Jeon , Younghan Kim | |
I-D last updated | 2013-07-03 | |
Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -06
by Alexey Melnikov
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -07 by Alexey Melnikov (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Dan Harkins (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Alexey Melnikov |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 06 (document currently at 08) | |
Result | Ready w/nits | |
Completed | 2013-07-03 |
review-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt-06-genart-lc-melnikov-2013-07-03-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq> . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt-07.txt Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov Review Date: 16 July 2013 IETF LC End Date: 3 July 2013 IESG Telechat date: 18 July 2013 Summary: Ready for publication as an Experimental RFC with some nits Major issues: None Minor issues: In 5.1.2: Dynamic IP Multicast Selector Mode Flag: This field indicates the subscription via MTMA/direct routing mode. If the (M) flag value is set to a value of (1), it is an indication that the IP multicast traffic associated to the multicast group(s) identified by the Multicast Address Record(s) in this mobility option SHOULD be routed locally (subscription via direct routing mode). If the (M) flag value is set to a value of (0), it is an indication that IP multicast traffic associated to the multicast group(s) identified by the Multicast Address Record in this mobility option(s) SHOULD be routed to the home network, via the MTMA (subscription via MTMA mode). All other IP traffic associated with the mobile node SHOULD be managed according to a default policy configured at the PMIPv6 multicast domain. The last sentence: I don't think you should use RFC 2119 SHOULD here. I think you are saying that this document doesn't affect all other IP traffic. So just use "is managed" instead of "SHOULD be managed". Is IANA Considerations section clear to IANA? I suggest you add at least the URI for the IANA registry. Is IANA registration policy compatible with the type of document (Experimental)? I can't check that, as I don't know which registry you are talking about. Nits/editorial comments: In 3.3: acronyms PBU and PBA need to be expanded on first use. They are expanded further down in the document.