Last Call Review of draft-ietf-softwire-map-10
review-ietf-softwire-map-10-opsdir-lc-brownlee-2014-10-12-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-softwire-map |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 13) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
| Deadline | 2014-10-14 | |
| Requested | 2014-10-12 | |
| Authors | Ole Trøan , Wojciech Dec , Xing Li , Congxiao Bao , Satoru Matsushima , Tetsuya Murakami , Tom Taylor | |
| Draft last updated | 2014-10-12 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -10
by
Francis Dupont
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -11 by Francis Dupont (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -10 by Brian Weis (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -10 by Fred Baker (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -10 by Nevil Brownlee (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Nevil Brownlee |
| State | Completed | |
| Review |
review-ietf-softwire-map-10-opsdir-lc-brownlee-2014-10-12
|
|
| Reviewed revision | 10 (document currently at 13) | |
| Result | Has Nits | |
| Completed | 2014-10-12 |
review-ietf-softwire-map-10-opsdir-lc-brownlee-2014-10-12-00
Hi all:
I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
operational area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat
these comments just like any other last call comments.
This draft specifies the DHCPv6 options needed to configure Softwire46
Customer Edge devices so as to provide IPv4 connectivity across an IPv6
network. The options are grouped into three 'containers,' one for each
type of Softwire46 mapping; each container may have several sub-options
within it. The draft describes the sub-options first, then the
containers and a table of which sub-options are mandatory, optional or
not allowed in each.
Overall I believe this document is ready to publish.
From the 'Operations' point of view, it's clear that this technology is
somewhat complicated to deploy - its various parts all need to work
together properly. Providers using it need to be sure that their
boundary routers and their customers edge devices will interwork
properly. That said, having DHCP as a tool to help with configuring
edge devices is well worth while.
When reading it, I found that I had to read it right through before I
understood the way sub-options are to be grouped - that became clear in
section 6, which presents the table showing what's allowed where. I
suggest a sentence at the end of section 3 (Softwire46 Overview) as a
forward reference to section 6 would be helpful.
In section 4.1, I found the explanation of the F flag confusing. If
it's set the rule "is to be used as" a forwading rule (FMR), if not set
"this rule is a basic rule (BMR). But the last sentence in the
paragraph says it may be both. Maybe the F flag says that although the
rule is a BMR, it may also be used as an FMR?
Last, one (yes, only one) typo:
Last paragraph of section 8: s/Note that system implementing/
Note that a system implementing/
Cheers, Nevil
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevil Brownlee Computer Science Department
Phone: +64 9 373 7599 x88941 The University of Auckland
FAX: +64 9 373 7453 Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand