Skip to main content

Early Review of draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-04
review-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-04-opsdir-early-linkova-2026-03-18-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-04
Requested revision 04 (document currently at 07)
Type Early Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2026-03-27
Requested 2026-02-18
Requested by Wassim Haddad
Authors Nathan Karstens , Stuart Cheshire , Mike McBride
I-D last updated 2026-06-15 (Latest revision 2026-06-13)
Completed reviews Intdir Early review of -04 by Brian Haberman (diff)
Opsdir Early review of -04 by Jen Linkova (diff)
Comments
WG Chairs would like to solicit 2 reviews. Please note the draft is in WGLC.

Thanks!
Assignment Reviewer Jen Linkova
State Completed
Request Early review on draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/2w9hCCZ78uXKsRlEgcaTqdFhsQI
Reviewed revision 04 (document currently at 07)
Result Ready
Completed 2026-03-18
review-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-04-opsdir-early-linkova-2026-03-18-00
Hi,

I have been selected as the Operational Directorate (opsdir) reviewer for this
Internet-Draft.

The Operational Directorate reviews all operational and management-related
Internet-Drafts to ensure alignment with operational best practices and that
adequate operational considerations are covered.

A complete set of _"Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management in
IETF Specifications"_ can be found at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5706bis/.

While these comments are primarily for the Operations and Management Area
Directors (Ops ADs), the authors should consider them alongside other feedback
received.

- Document: [draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-04]

- Reviewer: [Jen Linkova]

- Review Date: [March 19 2026]

- Intended Status: [Standards Track]

---

## Summary

- Ready: No issues found. This document is ready for publication.

## General Operational Comments Alignment with RFC 5706bis

I believe the document would benefit from an Operational Consideration section
discussing the migration path. Maybe just a few sentences saying that if a
unicast application is using this port currently, clients might gradually stop
ability to connect to it, as those client hosts become compliant with this
document?

## Major Issues

 > No major issues found.

---

## Minor Issues

The document currently says:

"The Multicast Application Port SHALL NOT be used as a destination port for any
non-multicast messages. It MAY be used as a source port by an application that
exclusively uses multicast messages. If any application messages are unicast,
then a different port should be used for the source port."

- Is 'should' in the last sentence intentionally lower-case?

Is it allowed (MAY/SHOULD NOT or even MUST NOT) to send a unicast message from
src port == mcast-app-port? Or is it intentional that the case of a unicast
message with src port == mcast-app-por is unspecified? (it would also explains
why Section 3 says that "Hosts SHALL discard all incoming, non-multicast
packets that use this destination port" but doesn't say anything about packets
with that source port).