Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-13
review-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-13-rtgdir-lc-hares-2023-06-05-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 18) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir) | |
| Deadline | 2023-06-02 | |
| Requested | 2023-03-14 | |
| Requested by | Acee Lindem | |
| Authors | Tony Li , Peter Psenak , Huaimo Chen , Luay Jalil , Srinath Dontula | |
| I-D last updated | 2023-06-05 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -16
by Reese Enghardt
(diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -16 by Chris M. Lonvick (diff) Rtgdir Last Call review of -13 by Susan Hares (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Susan Hares |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding by Routing Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/I60UWELOqkZj9Z3cEJGTviCUcmA | |
| Reviewed revision | 13 (document currently at 18) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2023-06-05 |
review-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-13-rtgdir-lc-hares-2023-06-05-00
The document is written in a clear and concise manner. The authors have done an excellent job of making a difficult subject clear and readable. Two technical sections should be checked against implementations of IS-IS with dense flooding (section 6.6.2.1 and section 6.6.2.2. I am not implementing so this check is beyond my capabilities. Editorial nit: section 3, requirement 3, sentence 2. "Just addressing a complete bipartite topology such as K5, 8 is insufficient." An informative reference to K5,8 or a bipartite topology might be helpful to readers. This is an optional editorial comment.