Skip to main content

Early Review of draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-03

Request Review of draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Early Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2023-07-16
Requested 2023-06-29
Requested by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
Authors Baptiste Jonglez, Juliusz Chroboczek
I-D last updated 2023-07-18
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Shivan Kaul Sahib
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Roni Even
Opsdir Last Call review of -04 by Sheng Jiang
Rtgdir Early review of -03 by Joel M. Halpern (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Joel M. Halpern
State Completed
Request Early review on draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at
Reviewed revision 03 (document currently at 04)
Result Ready
Completed 2023-07-18

I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of this draft.

The routing directorate will, on request from the working group chair, perform
an “early” review of a draft before it is submitted for publication to the
IESG. The early review can be performed at any time during the draft’s lifetime
as a working group document. The purpose of the early review depends on the
stage that the document has reached.

<case 1> As this document has recently been adopted by the working group, my
focus for the review is on providing a new perspective on the work, with the
intention of catching any issues early on in the document's life cycle.

<case 2> As this document is in working group last call, my focus for the
review was to determine whether the document is ready to be published. Please
consider my comments along with the other working group last call comments.

<case 3> If neither of the above describes the circumstances of the review,
then write a brief summary of the reasons for and purpose of the review here
(get this from the WG chair if you are not sure).

For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see

Document: draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-03.txt
Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review Date: 18-July-2023
Intended Status: Proposed Standard

    This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
    be considered prior to being submitted to the IESG.

Major Issues: N/A

Minor Issues: N/A

    In section 3.2 when describing the procedure, the paragraph about sending
    the Hello which contains the IHU says it it must contain the sender's
    timestamp.  It does not name that timestamp R2'.  The next paragraph refers
    to the timestamp as R2' (for good reason.)  Please put the naming in the
    earlier paragraph.