Skip to main content

Telechat Review of draft-ietf-core-groupcomm-bis-15
review-ietf-core-groupcomm-bis-15-tsvart-telechat-westerlund-2025-10-07-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-core-groupcomm-bis
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 17)
Type Telechat Review
Team Transport Area Review Team (tsvart)
Deadline 2025-10-07
Requested 2025-09-26
Authors Esko Dijk , Marco Tiloca
I-D last updated 2026-02-05 (Latest revision 2026-01-29)
Completed reviews Dnsdir IETF Last Call review of -14 by Petr Špaček (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -14 by Roni Even (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -14 by Sean Turner (diff)
Artart IETF Last Call review of -15 by Claudio Allocchio (diff)
Tsvart IETF Last Call review of -14 by Magnus Westerlund (diff)
Dnsdir Telechat review of -15 by Petr Špaček (diff)
Tsvart Telechat review of -15 by Magnus Westerlund (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -15 by Sean Turner (diff)
Intdir Telechat review of -15 by Brian Haberman (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Magnus Westerlund
State Completed
Request Telechat review on draft-ietf-core-groupcomm-bis by Transport Area Review Team Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/saPTGAzpkmd_hBM-PH6Hj0cXYIU
Reviewed revision 15 (document currently at 17)
Result Ready
Completed 2025-10-07
review-ietf-core-groupcomm-bis-15-tsvart-telechat-westerlund-2025-10-07-00
This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
discussion list for information.

When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
tsv-art@ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.

This is a follow up on my review of -14. 

I like to thank the authors for addressing the issues I spotted and explain details I had missed. 

I leave the handling of the reference to proxy to the ADs to discuss what their view are. The text
has been clarified that this is intended for future extension based on a specification.