Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-04

Request Review of draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 05)
Type Last Call Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2017-09-25
Requested 2017-09-12
Requested by Alvaro Retana
Authors Will Hargrave , Matt Griswold , Job Snijders , Nick Hilliard
I-D last updated 2017-09-18
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -04 by Stig Venaas (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Brian E. Carpenter (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Paul Wouters (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -05 by Brian E. Carpenter
Assignment Reviewer Stig Venaas
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 04 (document currently at 05)
Result Has nits
Completed 2017-09-18

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-grow-bgp-session-culling-04.txt
Reviewer: Stig Venaas
Review Date: 18 September 2017
IETF LC End Date:
Intended Status: Best Current Practice

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

The document is very easy to review and ready for publication except
for a couple of nits.

Major Issues:
No major issues found.

Minor Issues:
No minor issues found.

Operator (with capital O) has a specific meaning here. Also operator
(with lower case o) is used. It seems to be consistently used as
meaning operator in general (including Operators and Caretakers). This
is fine, but maybe some readers might be confused by the two meanings.
Perhaps it is worth pointing this out in the document.

Are you intentionally not using periods at the end of bullet points?
It is missing for all bullet points in 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 except in one

This URL in the appendix should perhaps start with "https://". It
currently just says