Skip to main content

IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts-10
review-ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts-10-genart-lc-holmberg-2026-02-11-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 11)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2026-02-18
Requested 2026-02-04
Authors Greg Mirsky , Ernesto Ruffini , Henrik Nydell , Richard "Footer" Foote , Will Hawkins
I-D last updated 2026-03-05 (Latest revision 2026-02-20)
Completed reviews Tsvart Early review of -07 by Lars Eggert (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -11 by Stephen Farrell
Genart IETF Last Call review of -10 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Christer Holmberg
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/mh57iGi6LVlFLkBujZctYJ44FqE
Reviewed revision 10 (document currently at 11)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2026-02-11
review-ietf-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts-10-genart-lc-holmberg-2026-02-11-00
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-ippm-asymmetrical-pkts-10
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review Date: 2026-02-11
IETF LC End Date: 2026-02-18
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: The document is well written, and easy to understand. I only have a
couple of editorial comments that I would like the authors to address.

Major issues: N/A

Minor issues: N/A

Nits/editorial comments:

Q1:

The Abstract is far too long. I think it would be enough with something like:

"This document specifies an optional extension to the Simple Two-way
Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) to control the length and/or
number of packets sent by a Session-Reflector in response to a single
test packet from the Session-Sender during a STAMP test session.
This supports cases where a Session-Reflector responding with
Asymmetrical Packets would ensure a closer approximation between
active performance measurements and the conditions experienced by
monitored application."

Q2:

In the Introduction, I suggest to put the current 1st chapter to the end. First
describe what the draft does, and then how it does it.