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-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04.txt

Reviewer:                                        Christer Holmberg

Review Date:                                  01.02.2017

IETF LC End Date:                          19.01.2017

IESG Telechat date: (if known)    02.02.2017



Summary:                                       The document is almost ready for 
publication, but there are some editorial nits that I'd like the authors to 
address.



Major issues:                                 None



Minor issues:                                 None



Nits/editorial comments:



INTRODUCTION:



Q1:        In the first sentence of the Introduction, I suggest to say:



"The failover protocol defined in this document provides..."



Otherwise it's a little unclear what failover protocol you are talking about.



Q2:        In the Introduction, before the first sentence, shouldn't there be 
some background text, including some information about the problem that the 
document solves. I know there is something in the Abstract, but I think there 
should also be something in the Introduction, before jumping into the solution.



Q3:        In the Introduction, I suggest adding a reference to the first 
occurrences of "DHCP service" and "DHCP server".



Q4:        In the Introduction, you switch between "This protocol" and "The 
failover protocol". Please use consistent terminology. This applies to the 
document in general.



SECTION 4:



Q5:        In the Abstract and Introduction it is said that DHCPv6 does not 
provide server redundancy. Then section 4 talks about failover concepts and 
mechanism.



Are those concepts something used for DHCPv6 today, but for some reason do not 
fulfil the failover protocol requirements?



OR, are these general concepts that will be supported by implementing the 
failover protocol?



I think it would be good to have an introduction statement clarifying that.




_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to