Early Review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay-01
review-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay-01-rtgdir-early-bocci-2016-10-03-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 09) | |
Type | Early Review | |
Team | Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir) | |
Deadline | 2016-10-03 | |
Requested | 2016-09-01 | |
Authors | Stephane Litkowski , Bruno Decraene , Clarence Filsfils , Pierre Francois | |
I-D last updated | 2016-10-03 | |
Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Early review of -01
by Matthew Bocci
(diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Melinda Shore (diff) Genart Last Call review of -06 by Roni Even (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -08 by Linda Dunbar (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Matthew Bocci |
State | Completed | |
Request | Early review on draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay by Routing Area Directorate Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 01 (document currently at 09) | |
Result | Has nits | |
Completed | 2016-10-03 |
review-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay-01-rtgdir-early-bocci-2016-10-03-00
Apologies for the multiple copies. Adding RTG Dir. Matthew From: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" <matthew.bocci at nokia.com> Date: Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 11:22 To: "draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay at tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay at tools.ietf.org> Cc: "rtgwg-chairs at tools.ietf.org" <rtgwg-chairs at tools.ietf.org>, "rtgwg at ietf.org" <rtgwg at ietf.org> Subject: Rtg Area Directorate QA review of draft-ietf-rtwg-uloop-delay-02.txt Authors, I have been asked to do a Routing Area Directorate QA review of draft-ietf-rtwg-uloop-delay-02.txt Summary: The rationale for this document is clear and the mechanism seems reasonably straight forward. However, one major comment that I have is that the English grammar is poor in some sections, and it is missing normal English articles in some places (a, an, the,…), making it hard to read. I would suggest that the authors go through the draft with a native English speaker to help resolve these nits. Comments: Minor Issues: Section 2.1 Fast reroute unefficiency s/unefficiency/inefficiency Section 4.1 Definitions, 2nd bullet: …by incrementing the timer vape when the IGP is instable. s/instable/unstable 4.3 Local Events The draft states that it assumes that only a single link failure has been seen by the IGP area. However, its not clear how you distinguish a single local failure from consecutive (non-simultaneous) failure that occurs within a given short timespan e.g. during the initial re-convergence period. It would help to clarify this. Regards Matthew