Last Call Review of draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-14
review-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-14-genart-lc-schinazi-2021-11-12-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 22) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2021-11-24 | |
| Requested | 2021-11-10 | |
| Authors | Clarence Filsfils , Ketan Talaulikar , Daniel Voyer , Alex Bogdanov , Paul Mattes | |
| Draft last updated | 2021-11-12 | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Last Call review of -14
by
Matthew Bocci
(diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -14 by Benjamin M. Schwartz (diff) Artart Last Call review of -16 by Cullen Jennings (diff) Genart Last Call review of -14 by David Schinazi (diff) Intdir Telechat review of -16 by Carlos J. Bernardos (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | David Schinazi |
| State | Completed | |
| Review |
review-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-14-genart-lc-schinazi-2021-11-12
|
|
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/66GU9k7Jb11jjBkHL9zpsD2RSFs | |
| Reviewed revision | 14 (document currently at 22) | |
| Result | Ready with Issues | |
| Completed | 2021-11-12 |
review-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-14-genart-lc-schinazi-2021-11-12-00
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://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-14 Reviewer: David Schinazi Review Date: 2021-11-12 IETF LC End Date: 2021-11-24 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: Well written document. A few minor issues which should be trivial to address. Major issues: None Minor issues: - in s2.7, please specify if a higher number is more preferred or less preferred - in s5.1, I would replace "A Segment-List of an explicit candidate path MUST be declared invalid when:" with "A Segment-List of an explicit candidate path MUST be declared invalid when any of the following is true:" (unless you mean "all of the following" Nits/editorial comments: - the term headend is never defined. If it's a term of art in this area perhaps a reference to the document that defines it would help? But if every reader is expected to know the term because of the required context then that might be OK.