Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oam-req-frmwk-04

Request Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oam-req-frmwk
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2021-02-16
Requested 2021-02-02
Requested by Martin Vigoureux
Authors Samer Salam , Ali Sajassi , Sam Aldrin , John Drake , Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
I-D last updated 2021-02-17
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -04 by Stig Venaas (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Melinda Shore (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -04 by David Schinazi (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -04 by David L. Black (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -07 by Melinda Shore (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Stig Venaas
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oam-req-frmwk by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at
Reviewed revision 04 (document currently at 10)
Result Has nits
Completed 2021-02-15
I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this
draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or
routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG
review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is
to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about
the Routing Directorate, please see

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs,
it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other
IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them
through discussion or by updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oam-req-frmwk-04.txt
Reviewer: Stig Venaas
Review Date: 2021-02-15
IETF LC End Date: 2021-02-16
Intended Status: Informational


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


This is the best written draft I've read in a long time. Thanks for
that! I could not find any issues, except one very minor nit.


As mentioned in some other reviews, it might be good to add the term P
to the terminology section.