Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis-14
review-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis-14-genart-lc-robles-2022-12-19-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 15) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2022-12-19 | |
| Requested | 2022-12-05 | |
| Authors | Lisong Xu , Sangtae Ha , Injong Rhee , Vidhi Goel , Lars Eggert | |
| I-D last updated | 2022-12-19 | |
| Completed reviews |
Opsdir Last Call review of -14
by Bo Wu
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -14 by Ines Robles (diff) Artart Last Call review of -14 by Spencer Dawkins (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -14 by Yoav Nir (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Ines Robles |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/dbdcab22Zk-MNpK2p1jNnDOnjMw | |
| Reviewed revision | 14 (document currently at 15) | |
| Result | Ready w/nits | |
| Completed | 2022-12-19 |
review-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis-14-genart-lc-robles-2022-12-19-00
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-tcpm-rfc8312bis-14 Reviewer: Ines Robles Review Date: 2022-12-19 IETF LC End Date: 2022-12-19 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: This document updates the specification of CUBIC to include algorithmic improvements based on implementations and recent academic work. It also moves the specification to the Standards Track, obsoleting RFC 8312. The document also requires updating RFC 5681, to allow for CUBIC's occasionally faster ramp up sending behavior. The errata proposed in RFC 8312 was rejected, thus, not included in this new version I only have minor nits for this document. Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: * Perhaps it would be nice to add a subsection in Section I, to explain the update to RFC5681 * It would be nice to add some explanation to the figure captions Thanks for this document, Ines