Telechat Review of draft-ietf-pim-port-
review-ietf-pim-port-genart-telechat-krishnan-2011-11-01-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-pim-port |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 09) | |
Type | Telechat Review | |
Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
Deadline | 2011-11-01 | |
Requested | 2011-11-01 | |
Authors | Dino Farinacci , IJsbrand Wijnands , Stig Venaas , Maria Napierala | |
I-D last updated | 2011-11-01 | |
Completed reviews |
Genart Telechat review of -??
by Suresh Krishnan
Tsvdir Last Call review of -?? by Gorry Fairhurst |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Suresh Krishnan |
State | Completed | |
Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-pim-port by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
Completed | 2011-11-01 |
review-ietf-pim-port-genart-telechat-krishnan-2011-11-01-00
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html ). Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-pim-port-09.txt Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan Review Date: 2011/11/01 IESG Telechat date: 2011/11/03 Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as an Experimental RFC but I have a few comments. Minor ===== Section 3.1 * From my reading of the document, it is not clear whether we can have a node advertise multiple capability options of the same transport protocol (say PIM-over-TCP-Capable) in the same message. e.g. A dual stack node might want to advertise its capability to do both IPv4 and IPv6. Is this possible? If so, how? Section 4.7 * Section 4 talks about the router with the lower connection ID initiating the transport layer connection but this does not really map into the rules mentioned in Section 4.7. Specifically, I am not sure Rule 3 for Node A in Section 4.7 conveys the same intent as section 4. Thanks Suresh