Last Call Review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-12
review-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-12-opsdir-lc-mitchell-2017-03-07-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 14) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
Deadline | 2017-03-03 | |
Requested | 2017-02-17 | |
Authors | Alessandro D'Alessandro , Loa Andersson , Satoshi Ueno , Kaoru Arai , Yoshinori Koike | |
I-D last updated | 2017-03-07 | |
Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Early review of -09
by Dave Sinicrope
(diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -12 by Jon Mitchell (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -12 by Tero Kivinen (diff) Genart Last Call review of -12 by Stewart Bryant (diff) Genart Telechat review of -13 by Stewart Bryant (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Jon Mitchell |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 12 (document currently at 14) | |
Result | Has nits | |
Completed | 2017-03-07 |
review-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-12-opsdir-lc-mitchell-2017-03-07-00
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. Document is Ready with Nits. I share the concern that it's not totally clear upfront this is a requirements versus solution document. There is also not much in the way of requirements of notification or how to signal back to the operator that a fault has occurred, but this may be OK if whatever solution would meet the requirements of this draft will include such text or rely on existing mechanisms discussed in RFC6371.