IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-07
review-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-07-genart-lc-knodel-2026-06-22-00

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.

Document: draft-ietf-intarea-multicast-application-port-??
Reviewer: Mallory Knodel
Review Date: 2026-06-22
IETF LC End Date: 2026-06-29
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: The document is well written and easy to understand. Where there
exists some ambiguity in the narrative text, I've attempted rewrites in the
nits section below. I've included questions to be considered "minor issues".

Major issues: None.

Minor issue: It seems to me there might be a more general statement needed in
the Intro, last paragraph: [MAY/SHOULD] NOT an application sending
[multi/uni]cast messages also send [multi/uni]cast messages using a different
destination port? (And what does using the Multicast Application Port as the
destination port have to do with it, architecturally speaking?) You could also
preview for the reader why a common port doesn't introduce privacy/security
issues as that seems a curiosity worth an intro mention.

Nits/editorial comments:

The following are rephrasings that, if correct, might improve readability:

 * Intro, second para: The same applies to Source-Specific Multicast (SSM; see
 [RFC4607]) because of uniqueness when both source unicast address and
 destination multicast address are taken together.

 * Firewall considerations section, first para: just remove parentheticals in
 favour of sentence clauses, eg commas.