Telechat Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-labreqs-04
review-ietf-nfsv4-labreqs-04-opsdir-telechat-ersue-2013-11-20-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-nfsv4-labreqs |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 05) | |
Type | Telechat Review | |
Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
Deadline | 2013-11-19 | |
Requested | 2013-11-11 | |
Authors | Thomas Haynes | |
I-D last updated | 2013-11-20 | |
Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -04
by Roni Even
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Roni Even (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Yoav Nir (diff) Opsdir Telechat review of -04 by Mehmet Ersue (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Mehmet Ersue |
State | Completed | |
Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-nfsv4-labreqs by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 04 (document currently at 05) | |
Result | Has nits | |
Completed | 2013-11-20 |
review-ietf-nfsv4-labreqs-04-opsdir-telechat-ersue-2013-11-20-00
I reviewed the draft with the title "Requirements for Labeled NFS" (draft-ietf-nfsv4-labreqs-04) for its operational impact. Intended status: Informational Current draft status: WG Document Summary: This document describes high-level requirements for the integration of flexible MAC functionality into the NFS v4.2. It describes the level of protections that should be provided over protocol components and the basic structure of the proposed system. ::: The document is focusing mainly on requirements and is aimed to publish as Informational. I don't see any implications from the operations and management pov. There are nits which need to be fixed: ** The document lacks an IANA Considerations section. http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist#anchor4 says: “ If there is no action for IANA, the section should say that, e.g., including something like "This document has no actions for IANA." == Outdated reference: A later version (-20) exists of draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2-19 Mehmet