Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-02
review-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-02-rtgdir-lc-hopps-2019-01-29-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Last Call Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2019-01-30
Requested 2019-01-16
Requested by Deborah Brungard
Authors Andrew G. Malis , Stewart Bryant , Joel M. Halpern , Wim Henderickx
I-D last updated 2019-01-29
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -02 by Christian Hopps (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -02 by Carlos Pignataro (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -02 by Paul Wouters (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -02 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Comments
Prep for Last Call
Assignment Reviewer Christian Hopps
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 02 (document currently at 04)
Result Has nits
Completed 2019-01-29
review-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-02-rtgdir-lc-hopps-2019-01-29-00
Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The
Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as
they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special
request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs.
For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
​http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would
be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call
comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by
updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-02.txt
Reviewer: Christian Hopps
Review Date: 1/29/2019
IETF LC End Date: N/A
Intended Status: Informational

Summary:

Choose from this list...

    This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
    be considered prior to publication.

Comments:

    The draft quality is high and very readable.

Major Issues:

    No major issues found.

Minor Issues:

    No minor issues found.

Nits:

- Page 3: "ACH" used w/o expansion.
- Page 3: "GAL" used w/o expansion.