Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color-08
review-ietf-pce-pcep-color-08-tsvart-lc-black-2025-01-31-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 12)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team Transport Area Review Team (tsvart)
Deadline 2025-02-07
Requested 2025-01-24
Authors Balaji Rajagopalan , Vishnu Pavan Beeram , Shaofu Peng , Mike Koldychev , Gyan Mishra
I-D last updated 2025-10-29 (Latest revision 2025-02-26)
Completed reviews Rtgdir Early review of -04 by Ron Bonica (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -11 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Tsvart IETF Last Call review of -08 by David L. Black (diff)
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -11 by Adrian Farrel (diff)
Assignment Reviewer David L. Black
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color by Transport Area Review Team Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/Spignp6xMQFSLBlbNhVTSioG3oM
Reviewed revision 08 (document currently at 12)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2025-01-31
review-ietf-pce-pcep-color-08-tsvart-lc-black-2025-01-31-00
This document has been reviewed 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 and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
discussion list for information.

When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
tsv-art@ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.

This is a straightforward document that extends PCEP (Path Computation
Element Protocol) to include color elements for TE or SR routing.  As a
minor extension to PCEP, it does not raise any significant transport-
related concerns.

I noticed one nit, which is a judgement call.  The authors should review
whether draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp ought to be a Normative
Reference (it's currently informative).  This is a judgement call, as
that referenced draft specifies functionality that excludes use of the
functionality in this draft, hence it is definitely relevant to an
implementer of this draft because the referenced draft limits the scope
of usability.

For clarity, this is a request for review, not a request for change.
Both outcomes (reference remains Informative, reference changed to
Normative) are acceptable to this reviewer.