Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07
review-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07-rtgdir-lc-ginsberg-2018-01-11-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 09)
Type Last Call Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2018-01-05
Requested 2017-12-15
Requested by Deborah Brungard
Authors Victor Moreno , Dino Farinacci
I-D last updated 2018-01-11
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -07 by Les Ginsberg (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -07 by Roni Even (diff)
Comments
Prep for IETF Last Call.
Assignment Reviewer Les Ginsberg
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 07 (document currently at 09)
Result Has nits
Completed 2018-01-11
review-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07-rtgdir-lc-ginsberg-2018-01-11-00
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 Last Call
comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by
updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07.txt
Reviewer: Les Ginsberg
Review Date: 11 January 2018
IETF LC End Date: Unknown
Intended Status: Experimental

Summary:
    This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
    be considered prior to publication.

Comments:

This draft is very well written. Ideas are presented in a logical and coherent
manner and I find it easy to understand the concepts even without necessarily
being an expert in the specific technology.

Major Issues:

No major issues found.

Minor Issues:

No minor issues found.

Nits:

The first use of LCAF (Section 2) should be expanded.

I find the acronym "RTR" a bit unfortunate for the obvious reason that it
intuitively represents "just a router". I wonder if the authors could consider
something like "ReTR". I am sensitive to the fact that this document has been
around since 2014 and has undergone significant WG review. I have not attempted
to track all of the email history regarding this document. Perhaps this point
has been considered and consensus has been that the RTR acronym is the best
choice. If so, feel free to disregard my suggestion, but as someone who read
this document for the first time I found myself looking back for the definition
of "RTR" multiple times as I read through the text.

   Les