Hi Daniel, I haven’t reviewed the full change set yet, but I have a couple of comments I didn’t want to hold back while I find time to review the rest.
> On Oct 20, 2022, at 1:23 AM, Daniel Migault <mglt.i...@gmail.com> wrote: [… snip …] > ### Section 4.3 > > I don't understand what this paragraph is telling me about the provision of > the > IP address by the HNA: > > ``` > The HNA works as a primary authoritative DNS server, while the DM > works like a secondary. As a result, the HNA must provide the IP > address the DM is using to reach the HNA. The synchronization > Channel will be set between that IP address and the IP address of the > DM. By default, the IP address used by the HNA in the Control > Channel is considered by the DM and the specification of the IP by > the HNA is only OPTIONAL. The transport channel (including port > number) is the same as the one used between the HNA and the DM for > the Control Channel. > ``` > > You start out by saying the "the HNA must provide the IP address the DM is > using to reach the HNA". (By the way when you say "is using" I think you mean > "should use". No?) I note the use of "must". > > > But then you go on to say that "the specification of the IP by the HNA is only > OPTIONAL". (I assume that "the IP" here means "the IP address" that was > discussed a few sentences back, probably you should add the word "address" if > so.) > > These two sentences, the "must" in the first one and the "OPTIONAL" in the > later, seem directly in opposition to one another. :-( > > To set the synchronization channel the secondary needs to know the IP address > of the secondary. (must). I guess you must mean the secondary needs the IP address of the *primary*? So, in this case, that means the DM needs to know the IP address of the HNA. > Either the IP is derived as the IP addressed used in the control channel or > the IP address is explicitly provided. The latest option is optional. > I hope the addition of explicit addresses your concerns: > > By default, the IP address used by the HNA in the Control Channel is > considered by the DM and the explicit specification of the IP by the HNA is > only OPTIONAL. I finally (think that I) get it, but I think the addition of “explicit” doesn’t really clarify it very much. Here’s how the text stands in version 21: ``` The HNA works as a primary authoritative DNS server, while the DM works like a secondary. As a result, the HNA must provide the IP address the DM should use to reach the HNA. The synchronization Channel will be set between that IP address and the IP address of the DM. By default, the IP address used by the HNA in the Control Channel is considered by the DM and the explicit specification of the IP by the HNA is only OPTIONAL. The transport channel (including port number) is the same as the one used between the HNA and the DM for the Control Channel. ``` A possible version that would be clearer to me: The HNA works as a primary authoritative DNS server, while the DM works as a secondary. As a result, the DM needs to know what IP address it should use to reach the HNA. Since the HNA initiates the control channel to the DM, the DM will normally be able to use the source address from the control channel as the IP address it will use to reach the HNA. The explicit specification of the IP address by the HNA is only OPTIONAL. The transport channel (including port number) is the same as the one used between the HNA and the DM for the Control Channel. Does that correctly capture what’s meant? Although, now that I read the text again, I’m also having a hard time understanding what is meant by the final sentence, "The transport channel (including port number) is the same as the one used between the HNA and the DM for the Control Channel.” I’m assuming that by “the transport channel” you mean the transport connection for the synchronization channel, but I still don’t understand what you mean about the port. Are you saying that the DM gleans the port it should use to contact the HNA, in the same manner as it gleans the HNA’s IP address? HNA DM --------- --------- port NNNN --------control channel--------> port MM port MM <-----synchronization channel----- port NNNN where arrow directions indicate who the initiator of the connection is, port NNNN denotes an ephemeral port, and port MM denotes a well-known port. As written, the most literal interpretation would be: HNA DM --------- --------- port NNNN --------control channel--------> port MM port NNNN <-----synchronization channel--- port MM which regrettably doesn’t make sense. Without a better understanding of your intended meaning, I’m afraid I can’t propose wording. [… snip …] > ### Section 4.5.3 > > ``` > Similarly to Section 4.5.2, DNS errors are used and an error > indicates the DM is not configured as a secondary. > ``` > > Related to the previous comment -- is this true regardless of what error code > is returned, for example would a FORMERR mean that the DM is not configured as > a secondary? > > Even given that any error implies that the operation failed, what if the DM > had > already been previously configured as secondary, and the operation were merely > updating some parameter? Would the previous configuration be voided, as the > text currently implies? Or would the DM remain configured as secondary, using > the previous configuration? > > We used DNS errors to imply that the standard DNS behavior is expected. When > teh update fails, the data remains in its previous step. Doesn’t that mean the text as written isn’t accurate, though? A possible rewrite could be “… an error indicates that the requested update to the DM will not take effect." Thanks, —John _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
