Telechat Review of draft-ietf-tcpinc-tcpeno-12
|Requested rev.||no specific revision (document currently at 19)|
|Team||Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)|
|Requested by||Alvaro Retana|
|Draft last updated||2017-10-29|
Rtgdir Telechat review of -12 by Papadimitriou Dimitri
Secdir Last Call review of -10 by Watson Ladd (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -10 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -12 by Watson Ladd (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -10 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -17 by Watson Ladd (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -16 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Please focus on any potential impact on routing applications (BGP, LDP, etc.).
|Reviewed rev.||12 (document currently at 19)|
|Review result||Has Issues|
Hello I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of this draft. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpinc-tcpeno/ As this document is in working group last call, my focus for the review was to determine whether the document has any potential impact on routing applications (BGP, LDP, etc.). Document: draft-ietf-tcpinc-tcpeno-12 Reviewer: D.Papadimitriou Review Date: 28-10-2019 Intended Status: Experimental Summary: I have some minor concerns about this document that I think should be resolved before it is submitted to the IESG. Comments: - May be the document can document if there is any modification for what concerns closing of connections (in its current version the document provides a requirement in Section 5 but no actual procedure) Nits: - Include ref. for Section 3 on Terminology (SYN, ACK, etc.) - Section 4 states " It uses a new TCP option kind " may be worth explaining which *new* kind ? - s/ 4.5. The Negotiated Tep/ 4.5. The Negotiated TEP Thanks, -dimitri.