Last Call Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout-nvme-05
review-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout-nvme-05-genart-lc-even-2023-10-30-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout-nvme
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2023-11-01
Requested 2023-10-18
Authors Christoph Hellwig , Chuck Lever , Sorin Faibish , David L. Black
I-D last updated 2023-10-30
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Deb Cooley (diff)
Artart Last Call review of -05 by James Gruessing (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -05 by Roni Even (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Roni Even
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout-nvme by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/oU-5xPj5Vobb9Wtab1BK5cNNB-E
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 07)
Result Ready
Completed 2023-10-30
review-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout-nvme-05-genart-lc-even-2023-10-30-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.

Document: draft-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout-nvme-??
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review Date: 2023-10-30
IETF LC End Date: 2023-11-01
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary:
The document is ready for publication as a standard track RFC

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
THe security section has normative language “SHOULD NOT be deployed” in two
paragraphs. Is there a reason for SHOULD NOT and not “MUST NOT”. I hope the
security review will mention it since I am not a security expert