Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review: draft-ietf-netext-update-notifications-07

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 13:05:20 -0500

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-ietf-netext-update-notifications-07
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date: 2013-08-22
IETF LC End Date: 2013-08-29
IESG Telechat date: not scheduled

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as Proposed Standard

I had to read through this text several times to convince myself 
implementers could figure out what order they were required to take 
steps in vs where they had flexibility:

    o  Upon accepting the Update Notification message, the mobile access
       gateway MUST process the message and perform the actions based on
       the Notification Reason.
       *  If the (A) flag in the message is set to a value of (1), the
          mobile access gateway MUST first send an Update Notification
          Acknowledgement message and set the status code field according
          to the result of processing the Update Notification message.

In particular, it's not immediately obvious if there is tension between 
that "MUST first" and having "the result of processing" available.
Please consider rewording to make it clearer that this "result of 
processing" is not intended to include waiting for the result of some 
action processing this notification message might trigger.

It might help readers understand the intended usual case retransmission 
mechanics if the expected default values listed in section 7 were called 
out earlier in the document.

---

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 17:06:47 -0400

Hi Robert,
  Thanks a lot for the review. We will include the changes in the next
revision we submit. Please see proposed changes inline.

> action processing this notification message might trigger.

I think we can lose the word first without losing anything. Does the
following rewording work for you?

OLD:
If the (A) flag in the message is set to a value of (1), the mobile
access gateway MUST first send an Update Notification Acknowledgement
message and set the status code field according to the result of
processing the Update Notification message.

NEW:
If the (A) flag in the message is set to a value of (1), the mobile
access gateway MUST send an Update Notification Acknowledgement message
with the status code field set based on the result of processing the
Update Notification message.

> out earlier in the document.

Sure. Will call out the defaults at first use.

Thanks
Suresh

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 16:51:09 -0500

> following rewording work for you?
Yes, thanks!