Subject: [multipathtcp] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on draft-ietf-mptcp-experience-06: (with COMMENT)

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 21:13:00 -0700

Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mptcp-experience-06: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mptcp-experience/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Should this text

   The FTP interference is expected and due to
   Application Level Gateways running home routers. 
   
be "running in home routers"? I'm not sure how to parse the sentence
otherwise.

When reading this text

   This may be
   excessive in some environments, in particular when the client and/or
   the server have a large number of interfaces. 
   
I am reminded that multiple IP addresses per interface are common in IPv6
and dual stack deployments. That would make the situation worse, wouldn't
it? If so, would that be worth saying?