Last Call Review of draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-14
review-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-14-genart-lc-fossati-2023-06-09-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 19) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2023-06-19 | |
| Requested | 2023-06-05 | |
| Authors | Daniel Voyer , Clarence Filsfils , Rishabh Parekh , Hooman Bidgoli , Zhaohui (Jeffrey) Zhang | |
| I-D last updated | 2023-06-09 | |
| Completed reviews |
Opsdir Last Call review of -14
by Sarah Banks
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -14 by Thomas Fossati (diff) Tsvart Last Call review of -14 by Wesley Eddy (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -15 by Mohit Sethi (diff) Rtgdir Last Call review of -10 by Ines Robles (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Thomas Fossati |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/WF6_i6kgEP9J8_frlekZtnm_6sQ | |
| Reviewed revision | 14 (document currently at 19) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2023-06-09 |
review-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-14-genart-lc-fossati-2023-06-09-00
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://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>. Document: draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-14 Reviewer: Thomas Fossati Review Date: 2023-06-09 IETF LC End Date: 2023-06-19 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: The premise is I am not a routing expert and I only had a high level understanding of segment routing before reading this document. That said, I have very much enjoyed the clarity and precision of the material presented and I think the authors have done a really good job, thank you! (BTW, I have found the terminology section especially useful to navigate the rest of the draft.) The instructions to IANA are concise and clear. From a Gen-ART perspective I reckon the document is ready. Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: * §1.1, 3rd bullet: s/period/period./ * §2.1, 4th para: s/may be leaf node/may be the leaf node/ * §2.2, 3rd para: s/Again note/Again, note/ * §2.2, 4th para: s/this document/this document./ * §2.2, 5th para: s/may be leaf node/may be the leaf node/ * §2.2.1, 2nd para: s/contains following/contains the following/ * §2.2.1, Replication State info model: s/maybe be empty/may be empty/ * §2.2.1: s/in a SRH. As per psuedo-code/in an SRH. As per pseudo-code/ * §2.2.2: s/apriori/a priori/ * §2.2.3: s/this same restrictions/this same restriction/ * §4: s/catalog/catalogue/