Telechat Review of draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-18
review-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-18-opsdir-telechat-schoenwaelder-2025-02-06-00

I have reviewed draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-18 and found it
geneally well written and organized. I have no substantial technical
comments, most of my comments are editorial or requests for
clarification.

- Is the title appropriate? Does it indicate to everyone that this is
  about routing metrics and routing algorithms? RFC 9350 has IGP in
  the name (which helps for those good at acronyms). Perhaps
  s/Flexible Algorithms/IGP Flexible Algorithms/ in alignment with RFC
  9350?

- From an operational perspective, is there a mechanism to efficiently
  debug any routing decisions taken and how different metrics have
  influenced them? More knobs can be lead to more surprises. Are there
  ways to determine whether a node correctly participates in specific
  FAD calculation?

- In section 2.1, I am unsure how the format shown in figure 1 relates
  to the enumeration a.-g. (if it is related at all).

- In section 3 just before 3.1, there is a missing space before
  Applications and a sentence ends with .".

- In section 4, the last sentence of the first paragraph seems to be
  missing a word or more.

- I am not entirely sure about the formulas in Figure 4 and Figure
  10. It is unclear what kind of numbers and operators are involved.
  Well, the division is said to be an integer division, but what about
  the other values/variables? What type and size do they have? And
  what exactly is "Modulus of(a,b)"?

- In section 5, s/the the/the/ ?

- In section 6, s/sec 13 of/Section 13 of/

- In section 7, s/Sec 13/Section 13/