Last Call Review of draft-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-06
review-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-06-opsdir-lc-wu-2022-05-01-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-sidrops-8210bis |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 06) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
| Deadline | 2022-04-29 | |
| Requested | 2022-04-15 | |
| Authors | Randy Bush , Rob Austein | |
| Draft last updated | 2022-05-01 | |
| Completed reviews |
Tsvart Last Call review of -06
by
Michael Tüxen
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Stewart Bryant Rtgdir Telechat review of -06 by Mohamed Boucadair Opsdir Last Call review of -06 by Bo Wu |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Bo Wu |
| State | Completed | |
| Review |
review-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-06-opsdir-lc-wu-2022-05-01
|
|
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/-XBQ0FS7VShg2VcQydTU7KoA_M8 | |
| Reviewed revision | 06 | |
| Result | Has Nits | |
| Completed | 2022-05-01 |
review-ietf-sidrops-8210bis-06-opsdir-lc-wu-2022-05-01-00
Hi all, I have been selected as the Operational Directorate reviewer for this draft. Review summary: I believe this document is "Ready with nits". And it would be better readability if the draft had added the reason for "obsolete" rather than "update". comments below: This draft obsoletes RFC8210 and section 1.2 list the following changes: 1, new sections 5.12 ASPA PDU type 2, section 11 two ROA PDU race conditions 3, The protocol version number incremented from 1 (one) to 2 (two) 4, the Section 7 has been updated accordingly suggestions: - Adds the reason why choosing "obsolete" RFC 8210 instead of "update", since the protocol version has been updated from 1 to 2 - The title "Protocol Version Negotiation" to be added to section 7 description. - Some major changes to other sections to be added: 5.1 Flags adds ASPA PDU specific processing 5.8. End of Data adds clarification text on version 1 changes 14. IANA Considerations