Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-softwire-ipv6-6rd-09

From: "McCann Peter-A001034" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 14:16:54 -0400

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) 
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see 
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before 
posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-softwire-ipv6-6rd-09
Reviewer: Pete McCann
Review Date: 17 May 2010
IESG Telechat date: 20 May 2010

Summary: Ready

Major issues: none

Minor issues:

Section 7:
   The configured values for these four
   6rd elements are identical for all CEs and BRs within a given 6rd
   domain.
...
   6rdBRIPv4Address    The IPv4 address of the 6rd Border Relay for a
                       given 6rd domain.

Taken together, these statements seem to imply that there can only
be one BR for a given domain, or at least that all CEs must be
configured
to have the same set of BRs.  I note that in section 7.1.1 it is
possible
to provision more than one BR address.  Can this set be different for 
different CEs?  I can imagine a situation where different CEs are homed
on different BRs.  

Section 9.2:
   In order to prevent spoofing of IPv6 addresses, the 6rd BR and CE
   MUST validate the source address of the encapsulated IPv6 packet with
   the IPv4 source address it is encapsulated by according to the
   configured parameters of the 6rd domain.  
This seems to say that the CE should match the source IPv4 address
of the BR to the source address of the encapsulated IPv6 packet,
when receiving traffic from a BR.  I assume that isn't what you meant.

Nits/editorial comments: none