Early Review of draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam-04
review-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam-04-rtgdir-early-shah-2022-06-14-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 13) | |
| Type | Early Review | |
| Team | Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir) | |
| Deadline | 2022-06-15 | |
| Requested | 2022-05-19 | |
| Requested by | Matthew Bocci | |
| Authors | Greg Mirsky , Sami Boutros , David L. Black , Santosh Pallagatti | |
| I-D last updated | 2022-06-14 | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Early review of -04
by Himanshu C. Shah
(diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -11 by Stig Venaas (diff) Genart Early review of -10 by Paul Kyzivat (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Himanshu C. Shah |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Early review on draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam by Routing Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/roZ0JzYCl309_3xhGKHRpKsQPOM | |
| Reviewed revision | 04 (document currently at 13) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2022-06-14 |
review-ietf-nvo3-geneve-oam-04-rtgdir-early-shah-2022-06-14-00
The document is well written and easy to follow. One suggestion. Appendix A describes other alternative approaches that were considered for informational purposes. It would nice to get a closure on that by stating in the last paragraph that "The options described here in the appendix were discarded in favor of the approach described in the main document". Please feel free to word it better.