IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp-05
review-ietf-ntp-over-ptp-05-opsdir-lc-li-2025-09-12-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2025-09-24
Requested 2025-09-11
Requested by Mohamed Boucadair
Authors Miroslav Lichvar
I-D last updated 2026-04-23 (Latest revision 2025-11-25)
Completed reviews Genart IETF Last Call review of -05 by Robert Sparks (diff)
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -05 by Tony Li (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -06 by Daniel Migault (diff)
Tsvart IETF Last Call review of -05 by Colin Perkins (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Tony Li
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/GkAy35zstj2jz7gH5S-EXSVd0EE
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 08)
Result Ready
Completed 2025-09-12
review-ietf-ntp-over-ptp-05-opsdir-lc-li-2025-09-12-00
OPSDIR Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ntp-over-ptp

Reviewer: Tony Li
Status: Ready

Disclaimer: I have been an NTP user since the 1980's, but am a novice
at PTP. I have reviewed the WG exchanges on this draft. I'm a Juniper
employee, but I have nothing to do with Juniper's implementation of
this draft.

Overall: I found this very straightforward and pretty well
written. There's a whole bunch of editorial issues, and I don't have
the energy to attack them all. I will let the RFC editor do their job.
From an operational perspective, this is an excellent idea which will
seem strange at first (don't cross the streams!), but ultimately makes
good sense. Assuming a sane configuration and reasonable debugging in
the endpoints, this should be straightforward to manage.

Details:

Section 1:

Paragraph 1:
s/supported/support/
s/processing/processing,/ (again in paragrph 3)
s/on accuracy/on the accuracy/

Paragraph 5:
s/transport/transports/