Subject: RE: [Opinion Request] DHCP Option for PacketCable VoIP Client Con figuration

From: Bernie Volz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 17:17:54 -0500

Here are some comments:

1. The abstract needs to be improved. I'm not sure what the first sentence
is trying to say? Seems like the Introduction section could serve as the
abstract?

2. The DNS sub-fields section states that they must be in IPv4 address
format, yet the table in 6.3 shows that either the FQDN:port or
[a.b.c.d]:port format is allowed. Shouldn't it just show [a.b.c.d]:port.

Also, exactly what's the difference between these DNS servers and the normal
DNS servers configurable with DHCP Option 6 (Domain Name Server Option, see
RFC 2132 section 3.8). Why can't those DNS servers be used? Is there a
reason why you need another set? If none are configured with these
sub-fields, should the VoIP client use the DHCP Option 6 ones?

3. I assume the brackets around the internet-address are required? And the
port number (:port) is optional? While the text implies this, it might be
worth while to make it perfectly clear. Examples of the various legal
formats might help. For example, the following are valid values that can be
used:

	132.151.1.19
	132.151.1.19:53
	ietf.org
	ietf.org:53

4. The text in section 5 regarding the format of the option and then the
sub-options within the option data could be more explicit. While we probably
all know what you mean, it would be good to be extremely explicit. I suggest
the latest DHCP Relay Agent Information Option draft
(http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-agent-options-12.txt)
for text that you can likely borrow from.

5. In 6., it says "For example, the standard DNS UDP port number is
42/udp.". The DNS UDP port number is 53, not 42. 42 is the old host name
server. From IANA:
	name             42/tcp    Host Name Server
	name             42/udp    Host Name Server
	nameserver       42/tcp    Host Name Server
	nameserver       42/udp    Host Name Server

	domain           53/tcp    Domain Name Server
	domain           53/udp    Domain Name Server

6. In other drafts that have used a single option to encode 'sub-options'
have called them sub-options. I suggest you rename sub-fields to be
sub-options? See the latest DHCP Relay Agent Information Option draft
(http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-agent-options-12.txt)
.

7. I'm not sure about the heading for 6.4 (Procedure for adding call control
server types). Why isn't this sub-fields (or sub-options)? Also, this
information should be in an IANA Considerations section (again, see the DHCP
Relay Agent Information Option draft as you can probably just 'borrow' that
text).

8. Aren't you missing the standard 'full-copyright statement' for
Internet-Drafts? Also, does 3Com or anyone claim any Intellectual Property
Rights regarding this draft? If so, you'll need to identify that.

9. You might clean up the formatting a bit. Currently, page headings
sometimes don't have any blank lines around them and it makes reading the
text difficult when a heading appears in the middle of the text.

Also, you're often missing 'a' or 'the' or similar words in some of the
sentences that would make them read better.

Other than the above, the concepts behind the draft are basically sound
(IMHO). Hope that's what you were looking for. 

- Bernie Volz
  Ericsson, DNS & DHCP Development Unit

-----Original Message-----
From: Burcak Beser [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 4:47 PM
To: DHCPv4 discussion list
Subject: [Opinion Request] DHCP Option for PacketCable VoIP Client
Configuration

(Sorry for the last minute broadcast. -nbb)

Per 47th IETF minutes I would like to get opinions related to the draft
'DHCP Option for PacketCable VoIP Client Configuration'
(http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-packetcable-00.txt).

I am preparing a new draft which only includes small changes in the
suboption fields.

Thanks in advance,

Burcak Beser
Pacific Broadband Communications

------------------------

<http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/00mar/47th-ietf-00mar-47.html>:

   DHCP Option for PacketCable VoIP Client Configuration
   Burcak Beser
   ------------
   This new option is used to hand out different configurations behind
one
IP address. The author will ask for review on WG mailing list.