Subject: [Gen-art] GenART review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 10:05:43 +0000

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: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-07.txt

Reviewer: Dan Romascanu

Review Date: 4/28/14

IETF LC End Date: 4/29/14

IESG Telechat date:

Summary: Ready, with a few small issues

Major issues: None

Minor issues:

1.       In section 10:

   When the server receives a DHCPv4-query message from a client, it
   searches for the DHCPv4 Message option.  The server discards the
   packet without this option.  The server MAY notify an administrator
   about the receipt of a malformed packet.  The mechanism for this
   notification is out of scope for this document.

It would be good to clarify the behavior of the server beyond possibly notifying an administrator at the receipt of a malformed packet. Is the packet discarded?

2.       I believe that [RFC3527] should rather be a Normative Reference. Even if the use of a Link Selection sub-option is under a 'may' - it cannot be implemented unless RFC3527 is read.

Nits/editorial comments:

In the introduction there is reference to the 'DHCP leasequery'. Actually in RFC 4388 one can find Leasequery either capitalized (in the title) or ALL-CAPS in the text.