Last Call Review of draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-19
review-ietf-netmod-acl-model-19-tsvart-lc-mankin-2018-07-11-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 21)
Type Last Call Review
Team Transport Area Review Team (tsvart)
Deadline 2018-07-09
Requested 2018-06-25
Authors Mahesh Jethanandani , Sonal Agarwal , Lisa Huang , Dana Blair
I-D last updated 2018-07-11
Completed reviews Yangdoctors Early review of -07 by Mahesh Jethanandani (diff)
Rtgdir Telechat review of -19 by Manav Bhatia (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -19 by Steve Hanna (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -19 by Allison Mankin (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -19 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -19 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Allison Mankin
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model by Transport Area Review Team Assigned
Reviewed revision 19 (document currently at 21)
Result Almost ready
Completed 2018-07-11
review-ietf-netmod-acl-model-19-tsvart-lc-mankin-2018-07-11-00
I've reviewed this document as part of the transport area review team's
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the
document's authors for their information and to allow them to address any
issues raised. When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should
consider this review together with any other last-call comments they
receive. Please always CC tsv-art@… if you reply to or forward this review..

Summary:
Almost Ready (but I do have a question)

Technicals:
I reviewed that the details about TCP, UDP, ECN, and DSCP are consistent
with the specifications, and that the specifications are accurate.  The
model is accurate for these.


Question:
 What is the use case for ACLs referencing TCP PSH and URG flags, and
sequence numbers?  These are not very predictable and I would think not
very useful for the work that ACLs do, but I'm willing to be informed.