Last Call Review of draft-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-06
review-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-06-opsdir-lc-wu-2022-05-01-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-sidrops-8210bis |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 13) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
Deadline | 2022-04-29 | |
Requested | 2022-04-15 | |
Authors | Randy Bush , Rob Austein | |
I-D last updated | 2022-05-01 | |
Completed reviews |
Tsvart Last Call review of -06
by Michael Tüxen
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Stewart Bryant (diff) Rtgdir Telechat review of -06 by Mohamed Boucadair (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -06 by Bo Wu (diff) Opsdir Telechat review of -08 by Bo Wu (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Bo Wu |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-sidrops-8210bis by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/-XBQ0FS7VShg2VcQydTU7KoA_M8 | |
Reviewed revision | 06 (document currently at 13) | |
Result | Has nits | |
Completed | 2022-05-01 |
review-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-06-opsdir-lc-wu-2022-05-01-00
Hi all, I have been selected as the Operational Directorate reviewer for this draft. Review summary: I believe this document is "Ready with nits". And it would be better readability if the draft had added the reason for "obsolete" rather than "update". comments below: This draft obsoletes RFC8210 and section 1.2 list the following changes: 1, new sections 5.12 ASPA PDU type 2, section 11 two ROA PDU race conditions 3, The protocol version number incremented from 1 (one) to 2 (two) 4, the Section 7 has been updated accordingly suggestions: - Adds the reason why choosing "obsolete" RFC 8210 instead of "update", since the protocol version has been updated from 1 to 2 - The title "Protocol Version Negotiation" to be added to section 7 description. - Some major changes to other sections to be added: 5.1 Flags adds ASPA PDU specific processing 5.8. End of Data adds clarification text on version 1 changes 14. IANA Considerations