That looks fine (in the -06), thanks. However, note that an IANA Considerations section is always required, even if it says that no IANA action is necessary.
Regards Brian Carpenter On 30/06/2015 08:38, Uma Chunduri wrote: > Hi Brian, > > Thanks for your consideration and for providing the modified text quickly. > That works and it's a great help. > Shall update this in the next version. > -- > Uma C. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 1:32 PM > To: Uma Chunduri; draft-ietf-karp-isis-analysis....@ietf.org; General Area > Review Team > Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-karp-isis-analysis-04 > > Hi Uma, > > See below... > On 30/06/2015 06:19, Uma Chunduri wrote: >> Hi Brian, >> >> Thanks for your review (apologies for the delay from my side). >> Response i-line [Uma]: >> >> -- >> Uma C. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 7:37 PM >> To: draft-ietf-karp-isis-analysis....@ietf.org; General Area Review >> Team >> Subject: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-karp-isis-analysis-04 >> >> 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-karp-isis-analysis-04.txt >> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter >> Review Date: 2015-06-13 >> IETF LC End Date: 2015-07-03 >> IESG Telechat date: >> >> Summary: Almost ready >> -------- >> >> Minor Issue: >> ------------ >> >>> 3.2. Key Management Protocols >> >> I don't like the references to expired drafts. These drafts almost have the >> flavour of normative references, since apparently they described recommended >> mitigation techniques. If they matter, they should be properly available. >> draft-weis-gdoi-mac-tek-03 >> draft-yeung-g-ikev2-08 >> draft-hartman-karp-mrkmp-05 >> >> [Uma]: Sure. But to give a bit context quickly - >> >> KARP WG started working on group keying protocol based on IKEv2 when I used >> these references. But, later scope is changed and this aspect didn't go >> forward as expected. >> So I would remove the references to draft-yeung-g-ikev2-08 and >> draft-hartman-karp-mrkmp-05. However, though expired, I would like to >> keep the reference for >> draft-weis-gdoi-mac-tek-03 and associated RFC 6407, so in future it can >> present a good reference to GDOI in this context. Hope this is acceptable >> else I shall remove this too. > > Thanks for the answer. I am still a bit concerned that a reader will be > slightly confused, though. Can I suggest trying to rephrase the sentence a > bit, something like: > > OLD: > A mechanism, > similar to as described in [I-D.weis-gdoi-mac-tek] can be used to > distribute group keys to a group of ISes in Level-1 area or Level-2 > domain, using GDOI as specified in [RFC6407]. > > NEW: > A mechanism is needed to distribute group keys to a group of ISes > in a Level-1 area or Level-2 domain, using the Group Domain of > Interpretation (GDOI) protocol as specified in [RFC6407]. An example > policy and payload format was described in [I-D.weis-gdoi-mac-tek]. > > Regards > Brian > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
