Skip to main content

Early Review of draft-ietf-idr-shutdown-05

Request Review of draft-ietf-idr-shutdown
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Early Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2017-02-03
Requested 2017-01-17
Requested by Susan Hares
Authors Job Snijders , Jakob Heitz , John Scudder
I-D last updated 2017-02-09
Completed reviews Rtgdir Early review of -05 by Lou Berger (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -08 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Leif Johansson (diff)
Early QA Review.  WG LC starting in January.  
Assignment Reviewer Lou Berger
State Completed
Request Early review on draft-ietf-idr-shutdown by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 10)
Result Has issues
Completed 2017-02-09
Reviewer: Lou Berger
Review Date: 2/9/17
Review requested by: 2/13
Intended Status: Standards track

    I have one minor comment about this document that I think should be
resolved before publication.


    Draft is short and easy to understand.  I see the need for one minor
clarification that can be resolved based on implementation experience.

Major Issues:

    No major issues found.

Minor Issues:
    In reading the document it's unclear if Shutdown Communication field
must include a trailing zero or not.  (I authored something similar once
and had an interop problem where one implementation assumed null
termination was required and included in length, while the other didn't.
Our intent was no null required, but the spec wasn't explicit.)   Either
are fine, and given there are implementations you might just want to
have the spec match the implementation.

reports nits that should be fixed.

That's it!