IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-protocol-18
review-ietf-ippm-capacity-protocol-18-genart-lc-eggert-2025-06-03-00
review-ietf-ippm-capacity-protocol-18-genart-lc-eggert-2025-06-03-00
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-capacity-protocol-?? Reviewer: Lars Eggert Review Date: 2025-06-03 IETF LC End Date: 2025-04-24 IESG Telechat date: 2025-06-26 Summary: Please see Magnus Westerlund's TSV-ART review for many of the points I would have made. Major issues: I'm kinda sad to see it's 2025 and we still invent new control protocols, especially over UDP. Most of the complexity in this doc is due to that. I can't see a requirement here that the control protocol (also) needs to run over UDP. Can we not simply exchange JSON blobs over HTTPS to configure the subsequent UDP testing flows? That should eliminate much of the complexity here, and would probably be more extensible as well. Nits/editorial comments: ## Inclusive language Found terminology that should be reviewed for inclusivity; see https://www.rfc-editor.org/part2/#inclusive_language for background and more guidance: * Term `traditional`; alternatives might be `classic`, `classical`, `common`, `conventional`, `customary`, `fixed`, `habitual`, `historic`, `long-established`, `popular`, `prescribed`, `regular`, `rooted`, `time-honored`, `universal`, `widely used`, `widespread` ## Nits All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you did with these suggestions. ### Typos #### Section 1, paragraph 3 ``` - unsymmetric traffic in combination with some two-way communication, - ^^ + asymmetric traffic in combination with some two-way communication, + ^ ``` #### Section 2, paragraph 5 ``` - UDPSTP is a client based protocol. It may be applied by consumers to - ^ + UDPSTP is a client-based protocol. It may be applied by consumers to + ^ ``` #### Section 2, paragraph 5 ``` - typical intra domain deployment. All these deployments require or - ^ + typical intra-domain deployment. All these deployments require or + ^ ``` #### Section 2, paragraph 5 ``` - controled by very low-end devices in a lab or limited domain + controlled by very low-end devices in a lab or limited domain + + ``` #### Section 3, paragraph 9 ``` - helps to keep the pinhole (or mapping, resepcitvely) active at - - - + helps to keep the pinhole (or mapping, respectively) active at + + + ``` #### Section 5.1, paragraph 1 ``` - address and / or a client to have one or more distinct IP adresseses, - -- + address and / or a client to have one or more distinct IP addresses, + + ``` ### Grammar/style #### Section 1, paragraph 3 ``` pecification is compliant with state of the art security implementations. Thi ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ``` Consider adding hyphens to this phrasal adjective. #### Section 2, paragraph 2 ``` cess bandwidth. Consumers may prefer an cross-domain measurement architecture ^^ ``` Use "a" instead of "an" if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. "a sentence", "a university". #### Section 3, paragraph 5 ``` ardless, whether it's IPv4 or IPv6. Thus the decision on the preferred IP add ^^^^ ``` A comma may be missing after the conjunctive/linking adverb "Thus". #### Section 4.2.2, paragraph 6 ``` on to prior authentication allows to re-use code of optional authentication m ^^^^^^^^^ ``` Did you mean "re-using"? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, "allow" + "to" takes an object, usually a pronoun. #### Section 4.2.2, paragraph 6 ``` ion mode, and additionally allows to re-use several protocol fields. Still, ^^^^^^^^^ ``` Did you mean "re-using"? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, "allow" + "to" takes an object, usually a pronoun. #### Section 4.2.4, paragraph 9 ``` is expected be on the order of double digit seconds to avoid pending conges ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ``` This word is normally spelled with a hyphen. #### Section 4.4, paragraph 5 ``` tchdog timeout is configured as a 1 second interval to trigger a warning mes ^^^^^^^^ ``` When a number forms part of an adjectival compound, use a hyphen. #### Section 4.5, paragraph 1 ``` (big-endian AB, most significant to least significant byte): It's 2025. Why ^^^^^ ``` A determiner may be missing. #### Section 6.1, paragraph 1 ``` l is further divided into a number of trial interval (see [TR-471]). Starts b ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ``` Possible agreement error. The noun interval seems to be countable; consider using: "a number of trial intervals". #### Section 6.2.1, paragraph 10 ``` oles of sender and receiver vary depending whether the direction of testing ^^^^^^^^^ ``` The verb "depend" requires the preposition "on" (or "upon"). #### Section 7.2, paragraph 5 ``` cur, synchronized (or at least well disciplined) clocks may be required. rttM ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ``` This word is normally spelled with a hyphen. #### Section 8, paragraph 3 ``` port number is requested to help configuring firewalls and other port-based s ^^^^^^^^^^^ ``` The verb "help" is used with an infinitive. #### Section 10, paragraph 6 ``` p PDU Command Response Field" registry" under the "UDP Speed Test Protocol (U ^ ``` Unpaired symbol: """ seems to be missing. #### Section 11.2.4, paragraph 7 ``` er Geib only joined later to help finalizing this draft. Thanks to Lincoln La ^^^^^^^^^^ ``` The verb "help" is used with an infinitive. ## Notes This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF]. You can use the [`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT]. [ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md [ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments [IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool