Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06
review-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06-genart-lc-yee-2016-02-06-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2016-02-05
Requested 2016-01-25
Draft last updated 2016-02-06
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -04 by Peter Yee (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Peter Yee (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Dacheng Zhang (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -04 by Susan Hares (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Peter Yee
State Completed
Review review-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06-genart-lc-yee-2016-02-06
Reviewed rev. 06 (document currently at 07)
Review result Not Ready
Review completed: 2016-02-06

Review
review-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06-genart-lc-yee-2016-02-06

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
comment.  For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<

http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>

Document: draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06
Reviewer: Peter Yee
Review Date: February 5, 2016
IETF LC End Date: February 5, 2016
IESG Telechat date: February 18, 2016

Summary: This draft has serious issues, described in the review, and needs
to be rethought. [Not ready]

The draft attempts to specify the framework for the management of
experimental LISP EID sub-prefixes, but really could use some additional
work to flesh out the management aspects that are left unsaid.

This draft fixes only two minor nits I raised in my review of the -04
version.  Nothing else has been addressed, nor have I received any feedback
on that review.  In light of this, I have little new to add.  It is possible
that the agreement between the IANA and the RIPE NCC will alleviate the
major concern I had with the draft, but not being privy to that agreement, I
can't make that determination.

My original review with the unaddressed comments can be found here:


https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/msg11620.html