Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-08
review-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-08-rtgdir-lc-lindem-2024-07-09-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 14) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir) | |
Deadline | 2024-07-12 | |
Requested | 2024-06-21 | |
Requested by | Jim Guichard | |
Authors | Dino Farinacci | |
I-D last updated | 2024-07-09 | |
Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Last Call review of -08
by Acee Lindem
(diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Rich Salz (diff) Rtgdir Early review of -00 by Christian Hopps (diff) Genart Last Call review of -08 by Jouni Korhonen (diff) Intdir Telechat review of -09 by Timothy Winters (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Acee Lindem |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding by Routing Area Directorate Assigned | |
Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/wuIT2mDxTknK6UjhluBHs0fVYp4 | |
Reviewed revision | 08 (document currently at 14) | |
Result | Has nits | |
Completed | 2024-07-09 |
review-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-08-rtgdir-lc-lindem-2024-07-09-00
Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Early Review/Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-08 Reviewer: Acee Lindem Review Date: 07/09/2024 IETF LC End Date: 2024-07-12 Intended Status: Standards Track Summary: This document specifies the Distinguished Name Address Family encoding for Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs) and Routing Locators (RLOCs). It also includes usecases for including Distinguished Names in LISP messages. My review didn't uncover any problems with the encodings or use cases. I do have some minor comments and some editorial suggestions. Major Issues: None Minor Issues: I have the following minor comments. 1. In section 3, could you more precisely define the places where the new encoding is used? I guess in any LISP message where an EID or RLOC is specified? 2. In section 5, the final sentence fragment didn't parse and it wasn't obvious to me how to edit it - "As well as identifying the router name...". 3. In section 9.2, The description of the onboarding process includes very specific details that aren't fully explained. Would it be possible to describe the use case at a higher level? 4. Remove change log prior to publication. Nits: I've attached some editorial suggestions. Thanks, Acee