Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-07
review-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-07-opsdir-lc-hares-2016-08-24-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 12) | |
Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
Deadline | 2016-08-30 | |
Requested | 2016-08-01 | |
Authors | Prashanth Patil , Tirumaleswar Reddy.K , Dan Wing | |
I-D last updated | 2018-12-20 (Latest revision 2017-01-12) | |
Completed reviews |
Genart IETF Last Call review of -07
by Ralph Droms
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -09 by Ralph Droms (diff) Secdir IETF Last Call review of -07 by Brian Weis (diff) Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -07 by Susan Hares (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Susan Hares |
State | Completed | |
Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 07 (document currently at 12) | |
Result | Has nits | |
Completed | 2016-08-24 |
review-ietf-tram-turn-server-discovery-07-opsdir-lc-hares-2016-08-24-00
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Please Forward this OPS-DIR review Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:11:39 -0400 From: Susan Hares <susaha1 at mail.regent.edu> To: joel jaeggli <joelja at bogus.com>, Benoit Claise (bclaise) <bclaise at cisco.com>, praspati at cisco.com, tireddy at cisco.com, dwing at cisco.com My normal mail address (shares at ndzh.com < mailto:shares at ndzh.com>) has an outage due to a storm in Michigan. I am sending this via my University email. Could you please forward this OPS-DIR review to OPS-DIR? Sue ------------------------ draft-iet-tram-turn-discovery Status: Ready for Publication, nits Comment: Thank you for a well-written draft. The security section provides the necessary warnings for this work. In the end, the deployments must implement the security. The Standard tools should provide the necessary query mechanisms since you are using DHCP, DNS Service Discovery, and Anycast. If implementations have any syslog or other reporting for systems violating this security, this will provide was to track this information. In the future, the webrtc - might new syslog and pub/sub work from NETCONF (PUSH reports) to report the security errors. Since it is upcoming work, I have not suggested it to A few editorial nits are below. Editorial NIts: 1) section 3, page 3, paragraph 1, sentence 1 OLD:/ TURN clients, by default, discover TURN servers(s) by means of local or manual TURN configuration i.e., TURN servers configured at the system level. / NEW / TURN clients, by default, discover TURN servers(s) by means of local or manual TURN configuration (i.e., TURN servers configured at the system level). 2) section 3, page 3-4, This sentence is confusing in the "or on top..." clause. I've suggested text below - but anything you can do to clarify will satisfy this nit. Old/ A client can choose auto-discovery in the absence of local configuration, if the local configuration doesn't work, or on top of local configuration. / New /A client can choose auto-discovery in the absence of local configuration if the local configuration does work, or choose auto-discovery on top of the local configuration./ 3) section 4.1.1, page 5, paragraph 1, sentence 4 Old /name option; While/ new/name option; while/ I believe grammar rules will require the second part of the sentence start without a capital. 4) section 5 DNS service, page 8, paragraph 3, Old/"_turnserver._udp", "_turnserver._tcp". / New/"_turnserver.udp", or "_turnserver._tcp"/ 5) section 9, paragraph 1, sentence 1. It might be useful to have STUN reference in this sentence. 6) page 12 section 9.3, last sentence. Your statement on BGP is correct. You do not need to change it. Did you want to also include BGP Flow specification filters? Sue Hares