IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag-04
review-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag-04-yangdoctors-lc-clarke-2025-09-02-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 09)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team YANG Doctors (yangdoctors)
Deadline 2025-09-20
Requested 2025-08-26
Requested by Acee Lindem
Authors Ran Chen , Detao Zhao , Peter Psenak , Ketan Talaulikar , Changwang Lin
I-D last updated 2025-12-10 (Latest revision 2025-12-10)
Completed reviews Yangdoctors IETF Last Call review of -04 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Rtgdir IETF Last Call review of -05 by Zhaohui (Jeffrey) Zhang (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -08 by Wes Hardaker (diff)
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -08 by Jürgen Schönwälder (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Joe Clarke
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag by YANG Doctors Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/yang-doctors/MMV58N8O42w-BYIiXtPPBpNDm-E
Reviewed revision 04 (document currently at 09)
Result Almost ready
Completed 2025-09-02
review-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag-04-yangdoctors-lc-clarke-2025-09-02-00
I have been asked to review this draft on behalf of YANG Doctors.  The YANG
module provided by this draft is rather short, and serves to add anycast prefix
support to OSPFv2 via an augmentation and an additional identity.  Overall, I
didn't find much wrong.

To be consistent with RFC9129, I recommend you rename the "AC-flag" identity,
"ac-flag" (this need only be done in the YANG module itself, not in the
document text description of the flag).  I don't typically see many uppercase
identifiers anyway, and RFC9129 uses "a-flag" for "Attach flag".

Please update the IANA considerations to match the template from RFC8407bis. 
We've been pushing the new guidelines there since that document is almost
published.