Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-leasequery-by-remote-id

From: Alfred Hönes <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 11:06:48 +0200 (MESZ)

I'm in support of this draft as well, in principle.

However, on a quick pass over the current version, I now see some
of my editorial points raised once in a review of a previous draft
version still not being addressed, and new ones having crept in.

My apologies, but I doubt I'll be able to compile a detailed report
today.  Therefore here's an advance notice of the more significant
details, where the first perhaps should be discussed:

The various definitions in Section 2 still talk about "hosts".

In recent discussions on broadband access gateway behavior
it has become apparent that, from the perspective of different
specifications, such devices have to behave as a "host" on the
upstream interface and as a "router" and the LAN side, and for
other specifications, this differentiation does not need to be
applied.  Since the distinction in some context really matters,
I reinforce my previous strong suggestion to   s/host/node/g .

Rationale:  For all purposes within the scope of the draft,
it does not matter whether a device acts as a router or a host
(i.e., its IP forwarding behavior and/or L2 switching behavior),
be it in general or per interface.  The only focal point of the
draft is the device's role in DHCP (client/server/relay agent).
Therefore the use of "host" is considered confusing and too
restrictive.  The more general term, "node", should be used
throughout.

Section 4, 2nd para:   3x "specified"/"specifies" in a single
sentence on two lines -- argh!   Please rephrase!
I suggest to change:

   A DHCPLEASEQUERY specified in this document specifies a lease query
   by Remote ID unless otherwise specified.
---
   When used in this document, the unqualified term "DHCPLEASEQUERY"
   indicates a lease query by Remote ID, unless otherwise specified.

I'll hurry up to document ASAP all the remaining editorials (like
singular/plural mismatches, wrong/missing articles, etc.) in the memo,
but please admit it might take me until Sunday to accomplish that.

Kind regards,
  Alfred Hönes.

-- 

+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes   |  Alfred Hoenes   Dipl.-Math., Dipl.-Phys.  |
| Gerlinger Strasse 12   |  Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18         |
| D-71254  Ditzingen     |  E-Mail:  [email-masked]                     |
+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+

---

From: Pavan Kurapati <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 16:51:33 +0530

Hi Alfred,
Apologies if some editorial comments were missed, I thought I covered
all of them. I will take care of both the changes suggested below
along with the minor changes given by idnits. Please do send other
comments as well. I will make the changes and publish the same next
week.

Thanks,
Pavan

On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Alfred HÎnes <[email-masked]> wrote:
>  Alfred HÎnes.
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>