Hi Francis,
Thanks for your review. The draft does say 'obsoletes' in the Abstract
and includes Appendix B on Changes since RFC 3682, but I guess we can say
this explicitly.
Wrt. your TrustRadius comment, the intent was to say that you would
accept any value within TrustRadius from 255. I.e., with trustradius 1,
255-1 = 254 would be OK. The simplest possible fix would be replacing "of
255" with "from 255", but I'm not sure whether that would be much clearer;
in fact the whole "TrustRadius" concept could be reworded out of the text
given that it isn't mentioned anywhere else (anymore)
The text was:
The main applicability of GTSM is for directly connected peers. GTSM
could be used for non-directly connected sessions as well, where the
recipient would check that the TTL is within "TrustRadius" (e.g., 1)
of 255 instead of 255. [...]
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Francis Dupont wrote:
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-rfc3682bis-09.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 2007/06/10
IETF LC End Date: 2007/06/15
IESG Telechat date: not known
Summary: Almost Ready
Comments: I have only one major comment: the document does not explain
it is a revision of RFC 3682, I propose to add a sentence at the
beginning of the introduction stating that with a reference.
Other points (minor/editorial/for the RFC editor):
- 2 page 4 in:
"The possibility of denial-of-service (DoS) attack prevention,
however, is based on the assumption that packet classification and
separation of their paths is done before they go through a scarce
resource in the system."
two proposals: "is" -> "are" and "packet classification" ->
"classification of (the?) packets"
- 2.2 page 5: (i.e., trusted) -> (i.e., are trusted)
- 5.1 page 7: hasn't -> has not
- 5.5 page 12: multi-hop -> multi-hop case
- 6.1 page 12: add a reference for RFC 3682 here (in fact, everywhere
at the exception of the abstract).
- A page 14: I can't parse "within "TrustRadius" (e.g., 1)
of 255 instead of 255"
Regards
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
