[dhcwg] Re: Actions for draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra after IESG evaluation
Mike Bishop <[email protected]> Fri, 22 Aug 2025 14:09:29 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.dhc |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <IA0PPF726CD7A1F4E9699F2DF1D4F9FFA17DA3DA@IA0PPF726CD7A1F.namprd22.prod.outlook.com> |
--===============8919752158360832458== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_IA0PPF726CD7A1F4E9699F2DF1D4F9FFA17DA3DAIA0PPF726CD7A1F_" --_000_IA0PPF726CD7A1F4E9699F2DF1D4F9FFA17DA3DAIA0PPF726CD7A1F_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable FWIW, I agree that I identified no direct changes to RFC7341; the RFC7341 p= rimitives are reused in the definition of a related protocol exchange. To m= e, the simplest fix is to remove the "amendment" language and focus on the = reuse of existing components. ________________________________ From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2025 6:43 AM To: dhcwg <[email protected]> Cc: Porfiri Claudio <[email protected]>; Suresh Krishnan (suresh= k) <[email protected]>; Mirja Kuehlewind <[email protected]>; J= ari Arkko <[email protected]>; Roman Danyliw <[email protected]>; Dale R. = Worley <[email protected]>; Mike Bishop <[email protected]> Subject: Actions for draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra after IESG evalua= tion Dear authors and DHC WG, Dale, Mike, Roman, The IESG evaluation of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra was positive, i= .e., the document is accepted but still requires three changes: - let=92s decide whether this I-D updates RFC 7341 (i.e., requiring an =93U= pdate=94 tag in the header); the sentence `this document specifies an amend= ment to [RFC7341]` in section 1 seems to indicate that it formally updates = RFC. From my side, it does not really update it, it is simply a different u= se case, so probably better to rephrase the sentence. - the GENART review, there is a mismatch between -05 and what was said in r= eply to Dale=92s review by email for the main technical comment in section = 3 (all other review comments are implemented). Either make a -06 consistent= with the reply to Dal e or discuss with him (cc: Roman Danyliw) to check w= hether he agrees with -05 - other ballots by Deb, Erik, and Ketan suggest editorial (typos) changes, = which should probably be executed. Once a revised I-D with the above changes is submitted, I am approving the = I-D. Regards -=E9ric --_000_IA0PPF726CD7A1F4E9699F2DF1D4F9FFA17DA3DAIA0PPF726CD7A1F_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html> <head> <meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3DWindows-1= 252"> <style type=3D"text/css" style=3D"display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bo= ttom:0;} </style> </head> <body dir=3D"ltr"> <div style=3D"font-family: Aptos, Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, = Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" clas= s=3D"elementToProof"> FWIW, I agree that I identified no direct changes to RFC7341; the RFC7341 p= rimitives are reused in the definition of a related protocol exchange. To m= e, the simplest fix is to remove the "amendment" language and foc= us on the reuse of existing components.</div> <div id=3D"appendonsend"></div> <hr style=3D"display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex=3D"-1"> <div id=3D"divRplyFwdMsg" dir=3D"ltr"><font face=3D"Calibri, sans-serif" st= yle=3D"font-size:11pt" color=3D"#000000"><b>From:</b> Eric Vyncke (evyncke)= <[email protected]><br> <b>Sent:</b> Friday, August 22, 2025 6:43 AM<br> <b>To:</b> dhcwg <[email protected]><br> <b>Cc:</b> Porfiri Claudio <[email protected]>; Suresh Kri= shnan (sureshk) <[email protected]>; Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehl= [email protected]>; Jari Arkko <[email protected]>; Roman D= anyliw <[email protected]>; Dale R. Worley <[email protected]>; Mike Bishop <[email protected]><br> <b>Subject:</b> Actions for draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra after IESG= evaluation</font> <div> </div> </div> <style> <!-- @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"} @font-face {font-family:Aptos} p.x_MsoNormal, li.x_MsoNormal, div.x_MsoNormal {margin:0cm; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif} span.x_EmailStyle17 {font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif; color:windowtext} .x_MsoChpDefault {font-size:11.0pt} @page WordSection1 {margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt} div.x_WordSection1 {} --> </style> <div lang=3D"en-BE" link=3D"#467886" vlink=3D"#96607D" style=3D"word-wrap:b= reak-word"> <div class=3D"x_WordSection1"> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Dear authors and DHC WG,</spa= n></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Dale, Mike, Roman,</span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"> </span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">The IESG evaluation of draft-= ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra was positive, i.e., the document is accepted= but still requires three changes:</span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"> </span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">- let=92s decide whether this= I-D updates RFC 7341 (i.e., requiring an =93Update=94 tag in the header); = the sentence `this document specifies an amendment to [RFC7341]` in section= 1 seems to indicate that it formally updates RFC. From my side, it does not really update it, it is simply a different = use case, so probably better to rephrase the sentence.</span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"> </span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">- the GENART review, there is= a mismatch between -05 and what was said in reply to Dale=92s review by em= ail for the main technical comment in section 3 (all other review comments = are implemented). Either make a -06 consistent with the reply to Dal e or discuss with him (cc: Roman Danyliw) to check w= hether he agrees with -05</span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"> </span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">- other ballots by Deb, Erik,= and Ketan suggest editorial (typos) changes, which should probably be exec= uted.</span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"> </span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Once a revised I-D with the a= bove changes is submitted, I am approving the I-D.</span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"> </span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Regards</span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"> </span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">-=E9ric</span></p> <p class=3D"x_MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"> </span></p> </div> </div> </body> </html> --_000_IA0PPF726CD7A1F4E9699F2DF1D4F9FFA17DA3DAIA0PPF726CD7A1F_-- --===============8919752158360832458== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KZGhjd2cgbWFp bGluZyBsaXN0IC0tIGRoY3dnQGlldGYub3JnClRvIHVuc3Vic2NyaWJlIHNlbmQgYW4gZW1haWwg dG8gZGhjd2ctbGVhdmVAaWV0Zi5vcmcK --===============8919752158360832458==--