Telechat Review of draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-tlv-09
review-ietf-sfc-nsh-tlv-09-intdir-telechat-halley-2021-11-09-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-tlv |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 15) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | Internet Area Directorate (intdir) | |
| Deadline | 2021-11-26 | |
| Requested | 2021-11-09 | |
| Requested by | Éric Vyncke | |
| Authors | Yuehua Wei , Uri Elzur , Sumandra Majee , Carlos Pignataro , Donald E. Eastlake 3rd | |
| I-D last updated | 2021-11-09 | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Last Call review of -08
by Stig Venaas
(diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Charlie Kaufman (diff) Genart Last Call review of -08 by Roni Even (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -08 by Scott O. Bradner (diff) Intdir Telechat review of -09 by Bob Halley (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Bob Halley |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-tlv by Internet Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/b4Nrc3z9dCPofR7BY9x2oFsOSus | |
| Reviewed revision | 09 (document currently at 15) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2021-11-09 |
review-ietf-sfc-nsh-tlv-09-intdir-telechat-halley-2021-11-09-00
I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-tlv-09. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more details on the INT Directorate, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/>. Based on my review, if I was on the IESG I would ballot this document as YES. The following are other issues I found with this document that SHOULD be corrected before publication: none The following are minor issues (typos, misspelling, minor text improvements) with the document: none I found the document to be well organized and the metadata contexts to be well specified. I agree with the SECDIR last call review by Charlie Kaufman that it would have been nice to be specific about what to do when bad length values occur, but am not worried about it as I'd expect an implementation to do appropriate checking, including bounds checking, and then do something reasonable (i.e. ignore or reject the packet) if there is a problem.