Last Call Review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth-10
review-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth-10-genart-lc-kline-2019-08-27-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 11)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2019-08-28
Requested 2019-08-14
Draft last updated 2019-08-27
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -09 by Jonathan Hardwick (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -10 by Daniel Franke (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -10 by Erik Kline (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -10 by David Black (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -10 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Tsvart Telechat review of -11 by David Black
Assignment Reviewer Erik Kline
State Completed
Review review-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth-10-genart-lc-kline-2019-08-27
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/Q9_YSR8rvZF4X16cZQZzbYfA3Cw
Reviewed rev. 10 (document currently at 11)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2019-08-27

Review
review-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth-10-genart-lc-kline-2019-08-27

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://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-auto-bandwidth-10
Reviewer: Erik Kline
Review Date: 2019-08-27
IETF LC End Date: 2019-08-28
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary:

Gentle reminder for the authors to double-check all the lower case "should"s,
"required"s, and "must not"s (etc) to make sure it's not important that they be
capitalized (since the case-sensitive requirements text is referenced).

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

There are some periodic grammatical changes that I think would be nice, but I assume that can get sorted out with the RFC editor.

Two random things I'll note:

Section 1> I can't find "Path Control Element" in RFC 5440. Should this be "Path Computation Element"?

Section 5.2>
    .  s/speaker wish to disable/speaker wishes to disable/
    .  s/of same type/of the same type/