Last Call Review of draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-10
review-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-10-secdir-lc-ladd-2018-12-24-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 17) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2018-12-27 | |
| Requested | 2018-12-13 | |
| Authors | Young Lee , Ramon Casellas | |
| I-D last updated | 2018-12-24 | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Last Call review of -08
by Ravi Singh
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -10 by Elwyn B. Davies (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -10 by Watson Ladd (diff) Genart Telechat review of -11 by Elwyn B. Davies (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Watson Ladd |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Reviewed revision | 10 (document currently at 17) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2018-12-24 |
review-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-10-secdir-lc-ladd-2018-12-24-00
Dear all, I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. The summary of the review is READY. This is a document in an area I know almost nothing about. It appears to be about an internal mechanism for configuring label based routing in an optical network to minimize the number of optical to electrical transitions along the route. I am perhaps a bit confused as to why the PCC would specify the constraints on wavelengths on hops that are not the end ones: if the packets must flow from A to B, shouldn't the PCE be the one to decide how to do that using all the resources available? Merry Christmas! Sincerely, Watson Ladd