Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe-07
review-ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe-07-secdir-lc-mundy-2017-12-14-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2017-11-30
Requested 2017-11-03
Authors Clarence Filsfils , Stefano Previdi , Gaurav Dawra , Ebben Aries , Dmitry Afanasiev
Draft last updated 2017-12-14
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -04 by Jonathan Hardwick (diff)
Rtgdir Telechat review of -07 by Andrew G. Malis (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -07 by Russ Mundy (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Russ Mundy
State Completed
Review review-ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe-07-secdir-lc-mundy-2017-12-14
Reviewed revision 07 (document currently at 10)
Result Ready
Completed 2017-12-14
review-ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-epe-07-secdir-lc-mundy-2017-12-14-00
Reviewer: Russ Mundy
Review result: Ready

Hi,

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

As with a number of ID’s, there is a significant amount of referencing of other
RFCs/IDs - so much so, that it is difficult to get a clear understanding of
what is being specified in the document itself (the diagrams are very useful -
well done). However, since this ID has an intended status of Informational, the
amount of referencing is probably acceptable but I would recommend that at
least RFC4272 be included in the Informative References list.

Russ