Few comments on draft-ietf-multi6-architecture-02

[Thierry Ernst <ernst@sfc.wide.ad.jp>]

Dear all,

Here are a few comments on draft-ietf-multi6-architecture-02


Section 2.
- Figure 1. only shows a site with 2 transit providers A and B. Wouldn't
it be useful to illustrate the case where the network is
"multi-attached" ? Then, wouldn't be useful to state if this draft
considers this specific case or not ? 

- What is the definition of "seamlessly supported" ? My mobility
background may not help me to undertand this term in the same way as it
is assumed in this document. I would use "Transparency". It's probably a
good idea to uniformize the terms between the mobility and the
multihoming fields, given the many identical issues.

Section 4.1:
- typo "remote domain domains"

- why the number 10**7 is used, and not, say, 10**10 ? Can we consider
the network everyone will have at home a site ? Such network would most
likely be multihomed to distinct ISPs.

Section 4.2
- I would add NEMO Basic Support (draft-ietf-nemo-basic-support-03.txt,
together with MIP6 (although there is no Route Optimization procedure in
NEMO Basic Support).

  [BTW, just being curious, can't we consider a NEMO multihomed to 2
  distincts ISPs as a site ? cf draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-01.txt]

Section 4.3
- typo in "...the only viable destination address to use the one that is
based ..."

Section 4.6
- "on packet ingress to the site": it that good English ?  Is "ingress"
used as a verb ?

- in "a large number of associated security considerations" shouldn't it
be "issues" instead of "considerations" ?

- "header rewriting on site exit is for" -> shouldn't it be "on
site-exit router" ?

- typo "the this would"

Section 5
- missing word around "there" in "to transform the ULP PDU to include
locator information there is an associated requirement"

Section 5.3.1
- Blank line missing before paragraphs "ICMP Triggers", "Routing Triggers", ...

Section 5.3.2
- I'm not sure the following sentence is fine: "An implication of this
selection process is that the host s that path selection policy ..."

- "select components": shouldn't it be "selected components" ?

- The word "IN" shouldn't be capitalized

Section 5.3.3
- in "...when all flows to and from a particular destination has
stopped": should be "have stopped"


Thierry.