# Éric Vyncke, INT AD, AD review for draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-06 CC @evyncke
Thank you for the work put into this document. Please find below my AD review. As the responsible AD, I expect all the points below to be addressed, either by a revised I-D, or an email reply. Of course, authors and WG can reject my points, but this needs to be justified. Once all the points are addressed, I will proceed with the publication process, i.e., IETF Last Call. Special thanks to Carlos Bernardos for the shepherd's detailed write-up including the WG consensus and the justification of the intended status. I hope that this review helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric Note: this AD reviews follows the Markdown syntax of https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/tree/main, i.e., they can be processed by a tool to create github issues. ## Critical issues ### Updating shepherd's write-up As the Q9 was addressed in revision -06, the write-up should be updated. Q11 should also be updated to state that PS is required for interoperation between source and members. ### Abstract s/The document *proposes assigning* a UDP port/The document *assigns* a UDP port/, be assertive as it will be published as PS. ### Section 1 Please add informative references to ASM and SSM. Perhaps ? s/source address and destination multicast address /source *unicast* address and destination multicast address / ? It is unclear (at least to me) what is `with a unicast port` in the last paragraph, is it a unicast post assigned to the application ? or ? Let's be clear. ### Section 6 Why not a MUST in `rules referencing the Multicast Application Port SHOULD also consider the destination multicast address` ? ### Section 7 What is meant by `ask if the Multicast Application Port may be used` ? I.e., to whom should the IANA ask the question ? ## Non-critical / cosmetic issues Note: these points must also be addressed. ### Note about IPv4/IPv6 Suggest adding a simple note in the introduction stating that this technique applies both for IPv6 and IPv4. ### Section 2 s/the Multicast Application Port SHALL NOT be used/the Multicast Application Port *MUST** NOT be used/ while SHALL/MUST are equivalent per BCP14, I find "MUST" more obvious. It is a matter of taste, feel free to leave as it is.
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
