Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis-11
review-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis-11-rtgdir-lc-mishra-2024-09-01-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 19)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2024-08-18
Requested 2024-07-10
Requested by Daniele Ceccarelli
Authors Sergio Belotti , Italo Busi , Dieter Beller , Esther Le Rouzic , Aihua Guo
I-D last updated 2026-05-22 (Latest revision 2025-11-03)
Completed reviews Yangdoctors IETF Last Call review of -04 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Rtgdir IETF Last Call review of -11 by Gyan Mishra (diff)
Yangdoctors Early review of -13 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -15 by Thomas Fossati (diff)
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -15 by Ran Chen (diff)
Comments 
Cluster with draft-ietf-ccamp-optical-impairment-topology-yang-16
Suggested to have a reviewer with L0/L1 expertise
Assignment Reviewer Gyan Mishra
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/U9G4pE1TPz_Dsmnpvzgf73B87HI
Reviewed revision 11 (document currently at 19)
Result Ready
Completed 2024-09-01
review-ietf-ccamp-rfc9093-bis-11-rtgdir-lc-mishra-2024-09-01-00
I have reviewed the latest version 11 of
the draft.  Many thanks to the authors in updating RFC 9193.

AFAIK I believe in this case a BIS to RFC 9193 was the correct path taken to
fix all the Layer 0 data types that were missing in RFC 9193. Nicely done and
very thorough work done by the authors and all contributors.

Major issues:
None

Minor issues:
None

Nits:
None