Last Call Review of draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-11
review-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-11-genart-lc-thomson-2013-10-27-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 14)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2013-10-31
Requested 2013-10-17
Authors Xingyue Zhou, Jouni Korhonen, Carl Williams, Sri Gundavelli, Carlos Bernardos
Draft last updated 2013-10-27
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -11 by Martin Thomson (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -12 by Martin Thomson (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -12 by Kiran Chittimaneni (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Martin Thomson
State Completed
Review review-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-11-genart-lc-thomson-2013-10-27
Reviewed rev. 11 (document currently at 14)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2013-10-27

Review
review-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-11-genart-lc-thomson-2013-10-27

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-netext-pd-pmip-11
Reviewer: Martin Thomson
Review Date: 2013-10-27
IETF LC End Date: 2013-10-31
IESG Telechat date: ?

This document is ready (PS), modulo a few niggles.

Minor issues:

Where is ALL_ZERO defined?  (Same for NON_ZERO.)  I can guess, but I
don't like doing that.

S5.3:
It's been a while since I've done DHCP, but doesn't the client use
port 68? Wouldn't that mean that the SA1(OUT) and SA2(IN) rules
require a label for both local_port and remote_port?  Or have we
started to use ephemeral ports at the client now (in which case, good,
because that port 68 thing is a major headache)?

Nits:

The overview sections don't make it easy to work out what this
document is actually defining.  It took me until 3.2.3 to be even
moderately certain what it was that this documented defined.  Is there
any way to be more specific about what extensions are being defined in
S1 or the lead-in to S3?

S1:

   "In this context, the mobility management support that
   is enabled for an individual IP host, which is the mobile node."

Seems like an unfinished sentence.  Or maybe a redundant "that".

S2:

This document really needs a f'rinstance.  It's pretty clear why this
is being done, but it's unnecessarily convoluted by a need to use the
official labels for everything.  For instance, LFN is probably just my
PC tethered to my phone (the MR).

S3.2.1:

Expand acronyms.

5.1.2:

The text around PBU is strange with regard to the lifetime of zero
conditions.  Suggest a four-way list rather than
two-way-plus-exceptions-on-each.