Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints-04
review-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints-04-rtgdir-lc-niven-jenkins-2017-11-28-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 05)
Type Last Call Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2017-11-30
Requested 2017-11-13
Requested by Deborah Brungard
Authors Dhruv Dhody , Daniel King , Adrian Farrel
I-D last updated 2017-11-28
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -04 by Ben Niven-Jenkins (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -04 by Scott O. Bradner (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Brian E. Carpenter (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -04 by Taylor Yu (diff)
Comments
In prep for Last Call
Assignment Reviewer Ben Niven-Jenkins
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 04 (document currently at 05)
Result Ready
Completed 2017-11-28
review-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints-04-rtgdir-lc-niven-jenkins-2017-11-28-00
RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints-04

Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The
Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as
they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special
request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs.
For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
​http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would
be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call
comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by
updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints-04
Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins
Review Date: 28th November 2017
IETF LC End Date: Not known
Intended Status: Proposed Standard

Summary: No issues found. This document is ready for publication.

Comments: The document is well written and readable with clear guidance to IANA.

Major Issues: No major issues found.

Minor Issues: No minor issues found.

Regards
Ben