Subject: [MEXT] a few comments on draft-ietf-mext-nemo-v4traversal-00

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:29:31 +0100

A few comments on draft-ietf-mext-nemo-v4traversal-00.txt

o section 2.3.1, para 1, line 10: suggestion to change "it will
  be tunneled" to "the home agent will tunnel the packet" (just to
  ease the reading first time).

o section 2.3.1, para 4, line 1: I think "routing header" should be
  "destination option".

o section 4.2, para 2, line 3: it does not read right that an IPv4 
  address can be compared to an IPv4 address in an IPv6 header.  
  The packet diagram in the A paragraph below indicates the 
  IPv4 CoA option is meant.

o section 4.2, Binding Acknowledgement packet: Remove the 
  "V6HOA (IPv6 home address)", a left over from previous revision, 
  and instead insert "ESP-header", similar
  to the what is done in the binding update packet above.

o section 4.3, para 1, line 10: The parameter NATKATIMEOUT is (in
  section 6) given the default value 110 seconds.  However, 
  RFC 3948 defining NAT keepalives, suggest 20 seconds.  Not clear 
  the reason for the difference.

o section 4.4.1 and section 4.5.1: somewhere in the text note, that
  ESP tunnel header may be present.

o section 7: Change "Neilsen" to "Nielsen" (two places).

Christian

_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext

---

From: "Hesham Soliman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:37:48 +1000

Thanks Christian, since these are not major comments I propose that we
handle them with the AD comments. We need to move this draft forward and it
would be more efficient to handle them all at the same time. 

Hesham 

 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: [email-masked] 
 > [mailto:[email-masked]] 
 > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 6:30 PM
 > To: [email-masked]
 > Subject: [MEXT] a few comments on draft-ietf-mext-nemo-v4traversal-00
 >