Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis-03
review-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis-03-opsdir-lc-dodge-2022-08-31-00

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments
were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the IETF
drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD
reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should treat
these comments just like any other last call comments.

This document describes extensions to the IS-IS protocol to support MPLS and
GMPLS Traffic Engineering (TE) for multiple ASs.  It defines IS-IS extensions
for the flooding of TE information about inter-AS links, which can be used to
perform inter-AS TE path computation.

This document is well written and very clear and understandable.

I have some minor nits:
1. Section 4.1 is rather vague about what information could be taken from BGP
and I was wondering whether it could be specified more clearly which
information is being referred to. After all, an example is then given in
section 5 regarding the remote AS number which is received in the BGP OPEN. 2.
In section 5, it says "e.g., the administration that originally supplied the
information
   may be lying,". I thought that 'lying' is rather blunt and whether this may
   be rephrased - for example that the information supplied is 'incorrect'.
3. In my opinion, in section 5, the security section, it would also be worth
mentioning/discussing  to what extent the use of the information supplied by
the new TLV and sub-TLVs at the entry-point ASBRs and other LSRs in the AS,
could lead to incorrect decisions, and whether it is possible to detect such
incorrect decisions.

Other than that, the document is ready.

Best Regards,
Menachem