Dear Authors/Chairs/ADs,

Please see below for feedback from the experts for this document.

Best regards,

David Dong
IANA Services Sr. Specialist

On Wed May 08 09:42:14 2024, pait...@ciena.com wrote:
> This document is simply too long to review. I'm about half way
> through, and will not have time to complete the review before May
> 10th.
> 
> 
> 
> * In the TOC, all the OLD / NEW section names are distracting. It
> would be much more readable if the TOC was limited to just two levels:
> 
> 1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
> 2.  Conventions and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
> 3.  Why An RFC is Needed for These Updates? . . . . . . . . . . .   6
> 4.  Update the Description  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
>   4.1.  sourceTransportPort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
>   4.2.  destinationTransportPort  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
>   4.3.  forwardingStatus  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
> 
> 
> 
> * In the Introduction, "some other parts" lacks context unless the
> reader is familiar with RFC9565, RFC7125, and the WG process that took
> place. So simply say, "some parts":
> 
> When OPSAWG was considering [RFC9565] which updates [RFC7125], the WG
> realized that some other parts of the IANA IP Flow Information Export
> (IPFIX) registry ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * Typo in 4.1.2. NEW :
> 
> See the assigned tranport protocol (e.g., TCP, UDP, DCCP, and
> SCTP) port numbers at https://www.iana.org/assignments/service-
> names-port-numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, please retain the UDP, TCP, SCTP, DCCP ordering. Same for 4.2.2,
> 4.4.2, and 4.5.2.
> See the assigned tranport protocol (e.g., TCP, UDP, DCCP, and SCTP)
> port numbers at
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers.
> 
> 
> * 4.2.2. NEW
> 
> "destination" x2 :
> 
> Description: The destination port identifier in the transport protocol
> header. For transport protocols such as
> UDP, TCP, SCTP, and DCCP, this is the source port number given in the
> respective header. This field MAY also
> be used for future transport protocols that have 16-bit source port
> identifiers.
> 
> 
> * 4.4.2. NEW
> 
> There's no mention of DCCP in the description, nor reference to
> [RFC4340], though DCCP is mentioned in the last paragraph of
> Additional Information.
> 
> 
> 
> * 4.5.2. NEW
> 
> Traffic is sent from a source port, not to it:
> 
> The source port identifier to which the Exporting Process sends Flow
> information.
> 
> 
> There's no mention of DCCP in the description, nor reference to
> [RFC4340], though DCCP is mentioned in the last paragraph of
> Additional Information.
> 
> 
> 
> * 6.3.2. NEW
> 
> No, it's the "flow end reason" registry:
> 
> See the Classification Engine IDs registry available at
> [https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xhtml#ipfix-flow-end-
> reason].
> 
> 
> 
> * 6.4.2. New
> 
> "See the NAT originating address realm registry at ..."
> Additional Information: See the assigned NAT originating address realm
> at
> 
> 
> * 6.5.2. New
> 
> "See the NAT Event Type registry at"
> Additional Information: See the assigned NAT Event Types at
> 
> 
> * 6.6.2. NEW
> 
> "See the firewallEvent registry at"
> Additional Information: See the assigned firewall events at
> 
> Same comment for many other sections. ie, where the text says, "Values
> are listed in the xyz registry.", the Additional Information should
> say, "See the xyz registry at ..."
> 
> 
> 
> * 6.11.2 NEW
> 
> Please append [RFC5102<https://www.iana.org/go/rfc5102>] here.
> For the methods parameters, Information Elements are defined in the
> information model document [RFC5102].
> 
> 
> * Typo in 6.12.2. NEW :
> 
> Additional Information:  See the assigned emelement data types at
>    [https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xhtml#ipfix-
>    information-element-data-types].
> 
> 
> 
> * 6.13.2. NEW
> 
> The ; should be a . as "The special value" is a new sentence:
> 
> subregistry; the special value 0x00 (default) is used
> 
> 
> 
> (Stopped at 6.14)
> 

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org

Reply via email to