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 | |
| Draft 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 | |
| Review |
review-ietf-multimob-pmipv6-ropt-06-genart-lc-melnikov-2013-07-03
|
|
| Reviewed revision | 06 (document currently at 08) | |
| Result | Ready with 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.