Telechat Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-08
review-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-08-genart-telechat-resnick-2017-02-10-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext |
|---|---|---|
| Requested rev. | no specific revision (document currently at 09) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2017-02-14 | |
| Requested | 2017-02-06 | |
| Authors | Xian Zhang, Haomian Zheng, Ramon Casellas, Oscar de Dios, Daniele Ceccarelli | |
| Draft last updated | 2017-02-10 | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Telechat review of -07 by Ben Niven-Jenkins
(diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -07 by Bert Wijnen (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -07 by Catherine Meadows (diff) Genart Last Call review of -07 by Pete Resnick (diff) Genart Telechat review of -08 by Pete Resnick (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Pete Resnick |
| State | Completed | |
| Review | review-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-08-genart-telechat-resnick-2017-02-10 | |
| Reviewed rev. | 08 (document currently at 09) | |
| Review result | Ready with Nits | |
| Review completed: | 2017-02-10 |
Review
review-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-08-genart-telechat-resnick-2017-02-10
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-08 Reviewer: Pete Resnick Review Date: 2017-02-10 IETF LC End Date: 2017-01-31 IESG Telechat date: 2017-02-16 Summary: Ready with Nits A couple of nits that I mentioned in my earlier review that you might want to address, but none of them are essential. (You may have decided that I was wrong; that's OK too.) I didn't bother Cc'ing the IETF list on this, since they're both very minor. Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: 3.1: A set of non-overlapping available frequency ranges MUST be disseminated in order to allow efficient resource management of flexi-grid DWDM links and RSA procedures which are described in Section 4.8 of [RFC7698]. Those MUSTs look weird to me. I think instead of "MUST be" you mean "are", since it doesn't look like an implementation really has a choice here. 3.2: Hence, in order to support all possible applications and implementations the following information should be advertised for a flexi-grid DWDM link: Is that "should" in there meant to be normative? That is, do bad things happen if I don't advertise one of those items? Or do you just mean "the following information is advertised..."?