Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ippm-alt-mark-10
review-ietf-ippm-alt-mark-10-genart-lc-dunbar-2017-09-28-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-ippm-alt-mark
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 14)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2017-09-27
Requested 2017-09-13
Requested by Spencer Dawkins
Authors Giuseppe Fioccola , Alessandro Capello , Mauro Cociglio , Luca Castaldelli , Mach Chen , Lianshu Zheng , Greg Mirsky , Tal Mizrahi
I-D last updated 2017-09-28
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -13 by Taylor Yu (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -10 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Intdir Last Call review of -10 by Brian Haberman (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -12 by Éric Vyncke (diff)
Rtgdir Last Call review of -10 by Russ White (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -12 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -13 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -13 by Éric Vyncke (diff)
Comments 
These are the reviews requested by the document shepherd.
Assignment Reviewer Linda Dunbar
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-ippm-alt-mark by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Reviewed revision 10 (document currently at 14)
Result Ready
Completed 2017-09-28
review-ietf-ippm-alt-mark-10-genart-lc-dunbar-2017-09-28-00
Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review result: Ready

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://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-ippm-alt-mark-10
Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review Date: 2017-09-19
IETF LC End Date: 2017-09-28
IESG Telechat date: ??

Summary:

This document is written very clear and comprehensive. It is Ready.
One single question remains open, it is minor.

Major issues: None

Minor issues:

Section 3.1.1, second paragraph states ".. every node along the path must be
able to identify unambiguously the colored packets".

I think the scheme should work even if some intermediate nodes don't support
the proposed scheme. If every node supports the scheme, using Link based
method, there shouldn't be any disorder of packets. Correct?

Section 3.1.1 last paragraph also states that the "how to choose the marking
field ... is out of the scope". Besides the DSCP field, what other options
there could be? Just curious.

Nits/editorial comments:

Thanks, Linda Dunbar
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art