Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-05

Hi Peter,
  Thanks a lot for your review. I will ask the authors to address your
comments in the next version of the draft.

Regards
Suresh

On 03/09/2013 03:13 AM, Peter Yee wrote:
> 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>
>
> Document: draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-05
> Reviewer: Peter Yee
> Review Date: Mar-08-2013
> IETF LC End Date: Mar-08-2013
> IESG Telechat date: TBD
>
> Summary: This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in
>       the review. [Ready with issues.]
>
> This draft catalogs and analyzes various means of supplying a host
> identifier to a
>
> remote server when Carrier Grade NAT or similar host obscuring technology
> is in use.
>
> General: There were sentences in the draft that I could not parse even in
> the context
> of surrounding text.  That's primarily why I'm marking this draft as
> "Ready with
> issues".  These sentences are supplied below.  Mostly, the document has a
> fair number
> of nits.  The general concept is fine.
>
> General: hyphenate uses of "address sharing" when it used as an adjective.
>  For
> example, "address-sharing device".
>
> General: expand acronyms on first use except if they are really well known
> in
> our community (e.g., TCP/IP) or where they appear in the abstract.
> Examples of
> acronyms in need of expansion are HIP, XFF, S.
>
> General: You will probably want to resolve Internet Draft references to
> something
> more permanent.
>
> General: The term "broken" should be replaced with something more specific
> or useful.
> I've made some suggestions below.
>
> Section 1, 2nd paragraph, last sentence: delete "an" before "information".
>
> Section 1, 3rd paragraph: change "are" to "include".
>
> Section 1, 3rd paragraph: change "customers unsatisfaction" to "and
> customers' dissatisfaction".
>
> Section 2, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: delete "an" before "extra".
> Change "than" to
> "beyond".
>
> Section 2, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: replace this sentence with "We
> call this
> information the HOST_ID."
>
> Section 2, 2nd paragraph: add a serial comma after "subscriber".  Serial
> comma use in
> the draft was inconsistent.
>
> Section 2, 3rd paragraph, 3rd sentence: I'm not sure why the HOST_ID and
> public IP address would be "relatively" unique.  Assuming that HOST_IDs
> are unique amongst
> the hosts hidden behind the public IP address and the public IP address is
> unique,
> I would have thought that the combination was globally unique.  My
> confusion may arise
> from the 4th sentence which is incomplete.  Perhaps those two sentences
> could be
> rewritten for clarity.
>
> Section 2, 4th paragraph, 1st sentence: change "put" to "conveyed".
>
> Section 2, 4th paragraph, 2nd sentence: change "put" to "conveyed".
>
>
> Section 3, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: considering using
> "identifiability" instead of
> "uniqueness".
>
> Section 3, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: replace "which" with "what".
>
> Section 3,1, 4th paragraph: add a comma after "re-write".  Change
> "re-write" to
> "rewrite".
>
> Section 3.1, 5th paragraph: I don't quite follow what's being said here.
> Is the point that the address-sharing function should reveal the same
> HOST_ID for any given host
> regardless of what layer or mechanism that HOST_ID is being conveyed
> across?  How does
> this relate to interference between HOST_IDs?
>
> Section 4.1.1, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: delete "an" before
> "information".
>
> Section 4.1.1, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: insert ", there are" after
> "hence".
>
> Section 4.1.1, 4th paragraph, consider replacing with: "Address-sharing
> devices using
> this solution would be required to indicate that out of band, possibly
> using a special
> DNS record."
>
> Section 4.1.2, 3rd paragraph, 2nd sentence: add a comma after "scenario".
> Change "broken" to "ill-advised".
>
> Section 4.2.1, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: add "A " at the beginning of
> the sentence.
>
> Section 4.2.1, 1st paragraph, 4th sentence: rewrite as "This IP option
> allows the
>    conveyance of an IPv4 address, an IPv6 prefix, a GRE key, an IPv6 Flow
> Label, etc."
>
> Section 4.2.1, 2nd paragraph: insert "an" before "IP".
>
> Section 4.2.2, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: change "for" to "to".
>
> Section 4.2.2, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: use of the term "filter" in
> this sentence
> is not clear.  Do you mean that that routes and middleboxes remove the IP
> options?  Or
> that they remove packets with IP options?  Or that they take other actions
> based on the
> presence of IP options?  Please clarify.
>
> Section 4.2.2, 2nd paragraph: replace "As a" with "In".  Define
> "host-hint" somewhere.
> Is it meant to be equivalent to HOST_ID?
>
> Section 4.3.1, 3rd sentence: change "their" to "its" both places in the
> sentence.
> Insert "or" before "subscriber".
>
> Section 4.3.2, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: insert "a" before "HOST_ID"
>
> Section 4.3.2, 2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence: change "in host" to "on the
> host".  Insert
> "the" before "address", and add a comma after "function".
>
> Section 4.3.2, 1st bullet item: this is the IETF.  We don't need no
> stinkin' OSI! :-)
>
> Section 4.3.2, 1st bullet item, 2nd sentence: replace the sentence with
> "Moreover, an
> updated version of [I-D.wing-nat-reveal-option] no longer allows conveyance
> of a full IP address as the HOST_ID is encoded in 16 bits."
>
> Section 4.3.2, 2nd bullet item, 1st sentence: delete the comma after
> "limited".
>
> Section 4.3.2, 2nd bullet item, 4th sentence: delete the comma after "ACK".
>
> Section 4.3.2, 2nd bullet item, 5th sentence: move "only" before "allows".
>  Change
> "to enclose" to "enclosing".
>
> Section 4.3.2, 3rd bullet item, 3rd sentence: the characterization of
> HOST_ID as
> leaked information seems pejorative.  And how is a "communication leg"
> defined?
> Is this a standard term for communications between a CGN and a remote
> server, or for
> other backbone-carried communications?
>
> Section 4.3.2, 4th bullet item, append a comma after "particular".
>
> Section 4.3.2, 5th bullet item, 1st sentence: replace "to" with "the".
> Change
> "preserve" to "preservation of".
>
> Section 4.3.2, 5th bullet item, 3rd sentence: change "to reveal" to
> "revealing".
>
> Section 4.4.1, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: move "not" before "to".
> Change "at" to
> "within".  Change "which" to "that".
>
> Section 4.4.1, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: change "This" to "The".
> Append "of the
> conveyed information" after "format".
>
> Section 4.4.1, 2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence: change "their" to "its".
>
> Section 4.4.1, 3rd paragraph: insert "the" before "X-Forwarded-For".
>
> Section 4.4.2, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence: delete "the" before "address".
>
> Section 4.4.2, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: specify by whom the initiative
> was launched.
>
> Section 4.4.2, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: append "who are" after
> "Wikipedia".
>
> Section 4.4.2, 4th paragraph, 1st sentence: would "transited" be more
> appropriate than
> "crossed"?  Insert "the" before "Forwarded".
>
> Section 4.4.2, 6th paragraph: change "implementation" to
> "implementations".  And that
> begs the question: implementations of what?  Delete "some" before
> "parsing".  Insert
> "an" before "XFF".
>
> Section 4.4.2, 7th paragraph: why is this "may be broken"?  Either the
> Forwarded header can be injected or it cannot.  Under encryption, the only
> way I can see to insert the
> header is if the encrypted TLS session is passing through a
> man-in-the-middle proxy
> that is spoofing both of ends of the communication in order to be able to
> transparently
> decrypt the traffic.
>
> Section 4.5.1, 1st paragraph, 4th sentence: insert "The" before '"PROXY"'.
>
> Section 4.5.2, 1st paragraph, last sentence: change "raise" to "arise".
> Append a
> comma after "firewalls".
>
> Section 4.5.2, 2nd paragraph: change "broken" to "infeasible".  Change
> "can not" to "cannot".
>
> Section 4.6.1, 3rd paragraph: replace "do" with "are".  Change "require"
> to "required".
>
> Section 4.6.1, 4th paragraph: insert "an" before "option".
>
> Section 4.6.2, 3rd paragraph: move "also" before "offering".  I presume
> the "IP connectivity services" are those being offered to the host being
> identified, but
> that should be made clear in the text since the sentence is vague as to
> which end
> of the conversation is being reference.
>
> Section 4.7.1: delete "an" before "identity".
>
> Section 4.7.2, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: insert "having" after "is".
>
> Section 4.7.2, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: delete "ported to be".
>
> Section 4.8, title: insert "of" after "Use".
>
> Section 4.8.1, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: replace "differentiating" with
> "host-identifying".
>
> Section 4.8.2, 1st bullet item: insert "The" before "Address" and then
> make "Address"
> lower case.  I'm not sure what this sentence is trying to tell me, however.
>
> Section 4.8.2, 2nd bullet item: replace "an" with "that the".
>
> Section 4.8.2, 4th bullet item: delete "Some" before "implementation" and
> then
> capitalize "implementations".  Delete "to" before "delay" and append "of"
> after "delay".
> Change "receiving" to "receipt of".  Delete the comma after "Request".
>
> Section 4.8.2, 5th bullet item: delete "may" before "receive" and then
> change "receive"
> to "receives".
>
> Section 4.8.2, 8th bullet item: delete "a".
>
> Section 4.8.2, 9th bullet item, 2nd sentence: change the first "are" to
> "is".  Delete
> "to be".
>
> Section 4.9.1, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: insert "the" before "address".
>  Append a
> comma after "IDENT".
>
> Section 4.9.1, 2nd paragraph, 4th sentence: change "16 bit" to "16-bit".
>
> Section 4.9.2, 1st bullet item, 2nd sentence: change "Alternatives" to
> "Alternative".
> Change "mechanism" to "mechanisms".  Change "design" to "designed".  I
> don't think you
> want the list of other transport mechanisms to include TCP since you've
> already said
> that IDENT is specific to TCP.
>
> Section 4.9.2, 3rd bullet item, 1st sentence: insert "that" before "the
> address".
> Insert "the" before "IDENT".
>
> Section 4.9.2, 4th bullet item, 2nd sentence: change "This" to "Such a".
> Change
> "deployable" to "feasible".  Delete "heavy and" unless you want to explain
> what
> heavy means.
>
> Section 4.9.2, 5th bullet item: delete "Some" and capitalize
> "implementations". 
> Delete "to" before "delay" and append "of" after "delay".  Change
> "receiving" to
> "receipt of".  Delete the comma after "response".
>
> Section 4.9.2, 6th bullet item: delete "a".
>
> Section 4.9.2, 7th bullet item, 1st sentence: change "are" to "is".
>
> Section 4.9.2, 7th bullet item, 2nd sentence: change "even" to "further".
>
> Section 4.9.2, 9th bullet item: change "non legitimate" to "illegitimate".
>
> Section 5, 1st paragraph after the Table 1 caption: append a comma after
> "[Options]".
> Insert ", and" before "ExtendTCP".
>
> Section 5, 2nd paragraph after the Table 1 caption: change "Address" to
> "address".
>
> Section 5, 3rd paragraph after the Table 1 caption: change "to establish"
> to
> "for establishing".
>
> Section 5, 4th paragraph after the Table 1 caption, 3rd sentence: change
> "hold" to
> "delay".  Change "receiving" to "receipt of".
>
> Section 5, 4th paragraph after the Table 1 caption, 4th sentence: change
> "at" to "on".
>
> Section 5, 5th paragraph after the Table 1 caption, 3rd sentence: change
> "hold" to "delay".  Change "receiving"
> to "receipt of".  Insert "the" before "IDENT".
>
> Section 5, 5th paragraph after the Table 1 caption, 4th sentence: change
> "at" to "on".
> Consider rewriting this sentence and the similar one in the previous
> paragraph for even
> greater clarity.
>
> Section 7, 3rd paragraph: insert "used" before "to convey".
>
> Section 8, 1st paragraph: append a comma after "Halpern".
>
> Section 8, 2nd paragraph: append a comma after "Wing".
>
> Section 8, 4th paragraph: change to "The privacy text was provided by A.
> Cooper."