Telechat Review of draft-ietf-ippm-otwamp-on-lag-07
review-ietf-ippm-otwamp-on-lag-07-intdir-telechat-winters-2023-11-20-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-ippm-otwamp-on-lag |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 08) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | Internet Area Directorate (intdir) | |
| Deadline | 2023-11-23 | |
| Requested | 2023-11-14 | |
| Requested by | Éric Vyncke | |
| Authors | Zhenqiang Li , Tianran Zhou , Guo Jun , Greg Mirsky , Rakesh Gandhi | |
| I-D last updated | 2023-11-20 | |
| Completed reviews |
Intdir Telechat review of -07
by Timothy Winters
(diff)
Artart Last Call review of -07 by Jean Mahoney (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -07 by Steve Hanna (diff) Genart Last Call review of -07 by Stewart Bryant (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Timothy Winters |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-ippm-otwamp-on-lag by Internet Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/FRJzR4yeNRdYzUInhTZJm3J7HjE | |
| Reviewed revision | 07 (document currently at 08) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2023-11-20 |
review-ietf-ippm-otwamp-on-lag-07-intdir-telechat-winters-2023-11-20-00
Reviewer: Timothy Winters Review result: Ready I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-ippm-otwamp-on-lag. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more details on the INT Directorate, see <https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/>. The document is well written and easy to follow. I did note that the new micro TWAMP Session-Sender packet format is over UDP with a specified payload which allows for the potential of IP fragmentation. After re-reading OWAMP Payload padding size is part of the session setup as a user might want to measure the impact of packet delay based on packet size. Therefore, I don't have any concerns about this document. Based on my review, if I was on the IESG I would ballot as No Objection.