Subject: Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-v6ops-assisted-tunneling-requirements-00.txt

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 03:37:32 +0300 (EEST)

On Sat, 17 Jul 2004, Pekka Savola wrote:
> This is the WG Last Call for comments on sending
> draft-ietf-v6ops-assisted-tunneling-requirements-00.txt, "Requirements
> for assisted tunneling" to the IESG for consideration as Informational
> RFC:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-assisted-tunneling-requirements-00.txt

Below are a couple of personal comments.  Nothing really major.  I 
think it makes sense to spell out a few most promising 
"non-requirements" as well, to make it clear..

semi-substantial
----------------

4.8. Security Threat Analysis

==> in this section, it would probably make sense to add an explicit
requirement that all the packets need not be signed/verified (i.e., data
integrity protection is as with configured tunnels today).  [with the
assumption that some securing might be useful for the signalling packets]

....

==> there could possibly be section 5.11 on requirements (or lack thereof)
for load balancing, "brokering" or whatever approach.

My personal opinion is that we should try to avoid the "broker" model if
possible because it adds a lot of complexity to the game (server-broker
communication and data sync, broker-client communication and redirects,
longer latency to set-up, etc.).

(It's worth noting here that load balancing etc. can be done on several
different layers: with IP routing, with DNS, with application (e.g., the
broker approach) -- I'd be interested to know whether e.g. IP routing + DNS
could be viewed as a sufficient means to deploy multiple servers.)

...

8. Acknowlegements

==> empty for now, please keep this in sync.

editorial
---------

==> the boilerplates need to be updated to RFC3668..

   "Assisted tunneling" is used in this document to described a

==> s/described/describe/

   This document analyze the requirements for such a tunnel set-up

==> s/analyze/analyzes/

   where the service is made available to all the IPv4 customers..  The   

==> s/.././