Skip to main content

Early Review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-vendor-05
review-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-vendor-05-rtgdir-early-mcbride-2024-08-19-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-vendor
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Early Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2024-08-18
Requested 2024-07-23
Requested by Dhruv Dhody
Authors Cheng Li , Haomian Zheng , Siva Sivabalan , Samuel Sidor , Zafar Ali
I-D last updated 2024-08-19
Completed reviews Opsdir Early review of -04 by Xiao Min (diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -05 by Mike McBride (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -08 by Xiao Min
Assignment Reviewer Mike McBride
State Completed
Request Early review on draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-vendor by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/bM1Cz4WQ4ImT6DIRD2CtfhLfVyw
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 08)
Result Ready
Completed 2024-08-19
review-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-vendor-05-rtgdir-early-mcbride-2024-08-19-00
Succinct and well written draft. It's ready. My only suggestion is adding a
little more into the iana considerations section. Something like:

"There are no IANA actions in this document, only a clarification. [RFC7470]
defines the Enterprise Numbers allocated by IANA and managed through an IANA
registry [RFC2578]. This document clarifies the Private Enterprise Numbers
(PEN) as described in the IANA registry."

And/or re-word the iana description up in section 3. That second sentence "This
document further clarifies that what the IANA registry described is the Private
Enterprise Numbers (PEN), in which registrations and the registration location
are further described by [RFC9371]." is awkward to me. Would this say the same
thing?:

"This document clarifies the Private Enterprise Numbers (PEN), as described in
the IANA registry. The registrations, and the registration location, are
further described by [RFC9371]."