Telechat Review of draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags-06
review-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags-06-opsdir-telechat-li-2025-03-25-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 07) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
| Deadline | 2025-03-24 | |
| Requested | 2025-03-09 | |
| Requested by | Mohamed Boucadair | |
| Authors | Ran Chen , Detao Zhao , Peter Psenak , Ketan Talaulikar , Liyan Gong | |
| I-D last updated | 2025-05-23 (Latest revision 2025-04-08) | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir IETF Last Call review of -03
by Henning Rogge
(diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -06 by Mike Ounsworth (diff) Opsdir Telechat review of -06 by Tony Li (diff) |
|
| Comments |
Please focus on the ops implications, clarity/lack/need of deployment/deployability, and management considerations. Thank you. |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Tony Li |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/zm9JOBOsQygcNtWuhCa_mYnirxU | |
| Reviewed revision | 06 (document currently at 07) | |
| Result | Has nits | |
| Completed | 2025-03-25 |
review-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags-06-opsdir-telechat-li-2025-03-25-00
OPSDIR Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags Reviewer: Tony Li Status: Has Nits Overall: Ready, but with a few nits. Details: Section 2: 1) OLD: This contains a variable number of 32-bit flags. NEW: This contains a variable number of flags, grouped in 4-octet blocks. Flags, by definition, are a single bit. 2) You write: If any trailing 32-bit block(s) are received without any bit being set in it, then the LSA MUST be considered malformed. This seems unnecessarily restrictive. Please consider dropping it. Postel's Law says that it should be accepted as it is semantically clear. Operationally, this will improve interoperability. Section 5.1.1: OLD: * Bit number (counting from bit 0 as the most significant bit) NEW: * Bit number (counting from bit 0 as the most significant bit of the first block) There is no specification of which way the blocks of bits are ordered within the TLV. This is a subtle hint that we are consistently being big-endian. If you would like to be less subtle, I would also suggest explicit wording in section 2. Repeat this change in section 5.2.1 as well.