Last Call Review of draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert-06
review-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert-06-opsdir-lc-jiang-2025-02-07-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 13) | |
Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
Deadline | 2025-02-12 | |
Requested | 2025-01-29 | |
Authors | Ron Bonica | |
I-D last updated | 2025-04-29 (Latest revision 2025-04-29) | |
Completed reviews |
Genart IETF Last Call review of -06
by Mallory Knodel
(diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -06 by Prachi Jain (diff) Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -06 by Sheng Jiang (diff) Intdir Telechat review of -08 by Bob Halley (diff) Opsdir Telechat review of -08 by Sheng Jiang (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Sheng Jiang |
State | Completed | |
Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/R--yqZTMJaJyHiHyZ4mWAIbZ0zE | |
Reviewed revision | 06 (document currently at 13) | |
Result | Has issues | |
Completed | 2025-02-07 |
review-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert-06-opsdir-lc-jiang-2025-02-07-00
I have reviewed this document as part of the OPS directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. Document: draft-ietf-6man-deprecate-router-alert-06 Reviewer: Sheng Jiang Review Date: 2025-02-08 This Standards Track document deprecates the IPv6 Router Alert Option, and state new protocols that are standardized in the future must not use the Router Alert Option. It clearly states to obsoletes RFC2711. This document is well-written. I fully agree the author's secure concern of IPv6 Router Alert Option. However, I am not sure deprecate/obsolete is the right action to take, giving there are current protocols in use still depend on it. The proposed deprecate/obsolete action is too much stronger than the author's own statement "Protocols that use the Router Alert Option may continue to do so, even in future versions." It is logic conflict, in my opinion. It may be more proper to give a guidance/recommendation not to use IPv6 Router Alert Option. It may be better to take deprecate/obsolete action after these current protocols depending on it have developed new version removed the dependency or themselves out of usage.