Hi David,

Thanks for this review. See below:

On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Black, David <david.bl...@emc.com> wrote:
> 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-eastlake-rfc5342bis-02
> Reviewer: David L. Black
> Review Date: June 5, 2013
> IETF LC End Date: June 4, 2013
>
> Summary:
> This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review.
>
> This draft updates the IANA registered Ethernet parameters for IETF use,
> including recording values assigned for documentation.  It also makes some
> minor changes to IANA procedures.
>
> IANA should review this entire draft, not just its IANA Considerations 
> section;
> Pearl Liang appears to have done that comprehensive review for IANA.

Right, I'm working on a response to Pearl.

> Major issues: None
>
> Minor issues: One, the IANA review also found this issue.
>
> Section 3.2 states:
>
>         IANA will assign "00-00-0E-00-42" as the protocol number under the
>         IANA OUI to be used for documentation purposes.
>
> IANA has not made this assignment, but this assignment request is not
> recorded in the IANA Considerations section where IANA actions are
> requested and recorded by IANA after they have been performed.  This
> assignment needs to be added to the IANA Considerations section;
> see item 5 in the IANA review.

OK.

> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> Section 1: This document uses an "IESG Ratification" process for some
> assignments.  This is not the same process as the "IESG Approval" process
> defined in RFC 5226.  As those names could be confused by a casual reader
> who is not strongly familiar with IANA processes, I suggest adding a
> statement that the "IESG Ratification" process is defined in this document
> and is not the same as the "IESG Approval" process in RFC 5226.  This could
> be added after the sentence that cites RFC 5226.

OK.

> Section 1.4: It would be helpful to point out that there is no OUI assigned
> for documentation purposes, but there are identifiers based on the IANA OUI
> that have been assigned for documentation purposes.

OK.

> In general, the use of the acronym IAB for Individual Address Block is
> unfortunate, but unavoidable, and this is clearly pointed out in the
> definition of the IAB acronym in section 1.2.  Nothing can or should be
> done about this.
>
> idnits 2.12.17 did not find any nits.

I think your suggestions are all good.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 d3e...@gmail.com

> Thanks,
> --David
> ----------------------------------------------------
> David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
> EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
> +1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
> david.bl...@emc.com        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
> ----------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to