I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART,
please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may
receive.
Document: draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-15
Reviewer: Ben Campbell
Review Date: 2011-03-09
IETF LC End Date: 2011-03-09
IESG Telechat date: (if known)
Summary: This draft is essentially ready for publication as a proposed
standard. I have a few minor comments that might be worth considering prior to
final publication.
Major issues:
None
Minor issues:
-- section 1.1: "This specification uses requirements language in lower case
and between quotation marks (e.g., "must") to denote requirements on the
interface between ANCP and the control application. Such requirements are
inherently untestable but need to be taken into account by the implementor."
I must admit to be curious as to the goal of this approach to normative
language. I don't necessarily think it's a problem--I'm just calling it out as
unusual in case anyone else cares.
-- section 3.1, definition of "Identifier"
Is there any concern about distinguishing between the two (effectively
different) protocols with the same value?
-- section 3.2, 2nd to last paragraph: "Port 6068 is used for TCP connection."
Is this a default, or is it required to always be 6068?
-- section 3.5.2, 2nd paragraph: "It is RECOMMENDED that both ends specify the
same timer value;"
What are the implications if they dont?
-- 3.6.1.4, Code value 7, recommended action : "If multiple instances of this
error occur..."
Can you provide any guidance on how many? I'm not asking for an exact count,
but a general idea would be helpful.
Nits/editorial comments:
-- section 1, 1st paragraph:
Please expand QoS on first mention
-- 3.1, RFC Editor's Note:
Any reason not to make the change in the draft prior to approval?
-- 5.1.2, heading before first bullet: "As normative requirements on ANCP
agents conforming to this section:"
I don't follow the sentence structure for this heading.
-- 9.2, general:
Can you reference the explicit URLs for the mentioned existing registries?
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf