Thanks for the review - I'll fix it up.
Alia
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Campbell [mailto:ben(_at_)estacado(_dot_)net]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 5:40 PM
To: General Area Review Team; enkechen(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com;
naiming(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com; rbonica(_at_)juniper(_dot_)net;
Atlas,AK,Alia,DMF R
Cc: jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)ericsson(_dot_)com; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Gen-ART LC review of draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-06
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 resolve these comments along with any other Last Call
comments you may receive.
Document: draft-atlas-icmp-unnumbered-06
Reviewer: Ben Campbell
Review Date: 2009-01-08
IETF LC End Date: 2009-01-27
IESG Telechat date: (unknown)
Summary: This draft is very close to ready for publication as
a proposed standard. I have a couple of minor comments and
questions that should be considered prior to publication, and
some editorial nits.
Substantive Comments:
-- Section 4.1, definition of Next-Hop flag: "This MUST be
clear unless the Interface Role is 3, indicating an outgoing
interface."
The interface role definition listed the value for outgoing
interface to be "1". Am I misreading something?
-- Security Considerations:
Are there any concerns about the extension data being
available to intermediary devices? Is there any concern about
unauthorized modification of the extension data (beyond what
is mentioned in the NAT section)? (I'm not saying they are
concerns--just checking to see if they have been thought about.)
Editorial Comments:
-- Abstract:
Please expand acronyms on first use for MIB and OSPF. ( ICMP
is probably well known enough to skip expanding.) The
Abstract should stand alone; even though they may be expanded
in the body, they should be expanded here.
-- Section 2:
Please expand ECMP on first use.
-- 6th paragraph from end of section:
s/permit/permits
-- Section 4.3, between figure 3 an figure 4:
It's not clear from the formatting if the line "Class-Num =
2" is part of figure 4, part of the caption for figure 3, or
just orphaned.
-- Section 4.3, Figure 4:
I find it confusing to have all the examples in a single
figure. I think it would be easier to read if you split them up.
-- idnits reports the following:
** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You
should update this
to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License
Policy document
(see http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is
required from
December 16, 2008. Version 1.34 of xml2rfc can be used
to produce
documents with boilerplate according to the mentioned
Trust License
Policy document.
... and ...
== Outdated reference: A later version (-11) exists of
draft-ietf-behave-nat-icmp-10
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf