Hi, You suggestions look good, and I am happy with your reply :)
Regards, Christer -----Original Message----- From: kkinnear [mailto:kkinn...@cisco.com] Sent: 02 February 2017 01:07 To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmb...@ericsson.com> Cc: Kim Kinnear <kkinn...@cisco.com>; gen-art@ietf.org; draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol....@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04 Christer, I have deleted the issues not under discussion. More comments, indented, below... > On Feb 1, 2017, at 5:57 PM, Christer Holmberg > <christer.holmb...@ericsson.com> wrote: > > Hi, > >> >>> Q3: In the Introduction, I suggest adding a reference to the first >>> occurrences of “DHCP service” and “DHCP server”. >> >> While I'm more than happy to do this, I don't actually know >> what you would like me to reference? We haven't defined >> either "DHCP service" or "DHCP server" in the glossary since >> we felt they were reasonably apparent from the context of this >> document. Are you thinking that we should reference RFC3315 >> on the first occurrence of "DHCP service" and "DHCP server"? > > Yes. Ok, I will do so in the next update. > >>> 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. >> >> The concepts and mechanisms discussed in Section 4 relate to >> the failover protocol, they aren't present in the regular >> RFC3315(et. al.) DHCPv6 protocol. I will add the following to >> Section 4 to clarify that: >> >> "4. Failover Concepts and Mechanisms >> >> The following concepts and mechanisms are necessary to the operation >> of the failover protocol, and they are not currently employed by >> the DHCPv6 protocol [RFC3315]. > > That's better. But, will the failover protocol provide support for those > concepts? If so, please indicate it. > How about this: "4. Failover Concepts and Mechanisms The following concepts and mechanisms are necessary to the operation of the failover protocol, and they are not currently employed by the DHCPv6 protocol [RFC3315]. The failover protocol provides support for all of these concepts and mechanisms. ..." Thanks -- Kim _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
