Subject: [mif] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mif-mpvd-arch-08.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 17:20:16 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Multiple Interfaces Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : Multiple Provisioning Domain Architecture
        Author          : Dmitry Anipko
	Filename        : draft-ietf-mif-mpvd-arch-08.txt
	Pages           : 23
	Date            : 2015-01-10

Abstract:
   This document is a product of the work of the MIF Architecture Design
   team.  It outlines a solution framework for some of the issues
   experienced by nodes that can be attached to multiple networks
   simultaneously.  The framework defines the concept of a Provisioning
   Domain (PvD) which is a a consistent set of network configuration
   information.  PvD aware nodes learn PvD specific information from the
   networks they are attached to and / or other sources.  PvDs are used
   to enable separation and configuration consistency in presence of
   multiple concurrent connections.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mif-mpvd-arch/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mif-mpvd-arch-08

A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mif-mpvd-arch-08

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 07:47:45 +1300

> 2.2. Implicit PvDs and Incremental Adoption of Explicit PvDs
...
>    PvD-aware nodes shall treat betwork information from different
>    interfaces, which is not identified as belonging explicitly to some
>    PvD, as belonging to separate PvDs, one per interface.

s/betwork/network/

> 3.2. Securing PvD Information
> 
> 
>    DHCPv6 and RAs both provide some form of authentication to ensure the
>    identity of the source as well as the integrity of the secured
>    message content.  While this is useful, determining authenticity does
>    tell a node whether the configuration source is actually allowed to
>    provide information from a given PvD.

Presumably "does" in the second sentence is intended to be "does not".

> 3.4. Selective Propagation

The abbreviation "ORO" is used but not defined.

   Brian

---

From: Dmitry Anipko <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 23:10:54 -0800

Thanks Brian. I will address these in the next rev.

On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Brian E Carpenter <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
>