Last Call Review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-13
review-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-13-genart-lc-even-2024-03-02-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 21)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2024-03-05
Requested 2024-02-20
Authors Ahmed Bashandy , Stephane Litkowski , Clarence Filsfils , Pierre Francois , Bruno Decraene , Daniel Voyer
I-D last updated 2025-03-06 (Latest revision 2025-02-12)
Completed reviews Opsdir Early review of -12 by Gyan Mishra (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -13 by Wes Hardaker (diff)
Rtgdir IETF Last Call review of -13 by Ben Niven-Jenkins (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -13 by Roni Even (diff)
Opsdir Early review of -11 by Gyan Mishra (diff)
Secdir Early review of -10 by Wes Hardaker (diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -09 by Andy Smith (diff)
Intdir Early review of -11 by Antoine Fressancourt (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Roni Even
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/3uEMppwALe-VVm2vJHjgU6XOh5U
Reviewed revision 13 (document currently at 21)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2024-03-02
review-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-13-genart-lc-even-2024-03-02-00
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://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.

Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-??
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review Date: 2024-03-02
IETF LC End Date: 2024-03-05
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: the document is ready for publication as a standard track RTC with nits

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
 1. Noticed that there is an IPR statement for the individual draft. Why there
 is no IPR statement for the WG document?
2. Was there a discussion to have the document as informational or experimental
and not standard track?