Stewart, thanks for your review. Authors, thanks for the lively discussion. :) I think it has improved the document. I entered a No Objection ballot.
Alissa > On Feb 20, 2018, at 12:46 PM, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bry...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Reviewer: Stewart Bryant > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-ietf-homenet-babel-profile-05 > Reviewer: Stewart Bryant > Review Date: 2018-02-20 > IETF LC End Date: 2018-02-26 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: This is understandable, and close to completion. There are a few > minor > points that need attention, and couple of major points that may just need > clarification. > > Major issues: > > In addition, > if implementations use conflicting route selection policies, > persistent oscillations might occur. > SB> Is this consistent with the statement earlier in the para that > SB> " Distinct > SB> implementations of RFC 6126bis Babel will interoperate, in the > SB> sense that they will maintain a set of loop-free forwarding paths"? > > ======= > > Since IPv6 has some > features that make implementations somewhat simpler and more > reliable (notably link-local addresses), we require carrying > control data over IPv6. > SB> Earlier you said that IPv4 also had Link Local addresses, so how > SB> can link local addresses be the deciding selection criteria? Is there > SB> something technically better about IPv6 LL? > > Minor issues: > > Rationale: support for wireless transit links is a "killer > feature" of Homenet, something that is requested by our users and > easy to explain to our bosses. In the absence of dynamically > > SB> Not sure explicability to your boss counts for much as a basis for > SB> a feature an international standard. > > ====== > > Nits/editorial comments: > > Abstract > > This document defines the subset of the Babel routing protocol and > its extensions that a Homenet router must implement, as well as the > interactions between HNCP and Babel. > > SB> HNCP needs to be expanded > SB> Both need a reference, but the reference needs to be expanded > SB> i.e. RFC7788 not [RFC7788] > > ===== > > The core of the Homenet protocol suite consists of HNCP [RFC7788], a > SB> HNCP needs to be expanded on first use > > ===== > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > gen-...@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
