Joel,

Thanks for your review! We uploaded 
draft-ietf-pim-zeroconf-mcast-addr-alloc-ps-08 and made changes based on your 
feedback:

> the text is entirely about collision on the derived MAC address.  Could the 
> title be clarified?

I’m hesitant to change the document title because it would narrow the focus too 
much are take away from the requirements (which are important for some 
following docs), but we added a few key references to “link-layer address 
collisions” early in the document to direct the user’s attention to this 
earlier.

> it may be that the document assumes there is already a way to provide 
> zeroconf IP multicast address that are collision free

We added a paragraph to the introduction discussing RFCs 2730, 3306, 4489, and 
3307.

Best Regards,

Nate

From: Joel Halpern via Datatracker <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 11:02
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; 
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: [Last-Call] draft-ietf-pim-zeroconf-mcast-addr-alloc-ps-07 ietf last 
call Genart review

Document: draft-ietf-pim-zeroconf-mcast-addr-alloc-ps Title: Zeroconf Multicast 
Address Allocation Problem Statement and Requirements Reviewer: Joel Halpern 
Review result: Ready with Issues I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this 
draft. 


Document: draft-ietf-pim-zeroconf-mcast-addr-alloc-ps

Title: Zeroconf Multicast Address Allocation Problem Statement and Requirements

Reviewer: Joel Halpern

Review result: Ready with Issues



I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area

Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed

by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just

like any other last call comments.



For more information, please see the FAQ at



<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ__;!!EJc4YC3iFmQ!Vb9TX6lBldFuWq4NDxM6Cko_CwnMAad7BGR064SbLDCpCaWKKV3pkX9zIPPj_usXuWxPFN2mZqUREeaSkQ$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ__;!!EJc4YC3iFmQ!Vb9TX6lBldFuWq4NDxM6Cko_CwnMAad7BGR064SbLDCpCaWKKV3pkX9zIPPj_usXuWxPFN2mZqUREeaSkQ$>>.



Document: draft-ietf-pim-zeroconf-mcast-addr-alloc-ps-07

Reviewer: Joel Halpern

Review Date: 2025-10-07

IETF LC End Date: 2025-10-17

IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat



Summary: This document is readable and in good shape.  I have a minor comment

for your consideration



Major issues: N/A



Minor issues:

    Section 2i s called "Address Collision.  Seeing as tis is an IETF draft, I

    had started out assuming this was about two groups self-assigning the same

    IP Multicast address.  However, the text is entirely about collision on the

    derived MAC address.  Could the title be clarified?

     I am not sure, but it may be that the document assumes there is already a

     way to provide zeroconf IP multicast address that are collision free.  In

     which case the only colissions are MAAC level.  If that is the assumption,

     it should be stated with references.  If that is not assumed, then some

     discussion of the IP level allocation requirements would seem appropriate.



Nits/editorial comments:





--

last-call mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

To unsubscribe send an email to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

________________________________

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the sole use of 
the intended recipient(s) and contain information that may be Garmin 
confidential and/or Garmin legally privileged. If you have received this email 
in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message. Any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this communication (including 
attachments) by someone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. Thank 
you.
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to