Telechat Review of draft-ietf-teas-5g-ns-ip-mpls-16
review-ietf-teas-5g-ns-ip-mpls-16-intdir-telechat-winters-2025-03-20-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-teas-5g-ns-ip-mpls
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 18)
Type Telechat Review
Team Internet Area Directorate (intdir)
Deadline 2025-02-27
Requested 2025-02-04
Requested by Éric Vyncke
Authors Krzysztof Grzegorz Szarkowicz , Richard Roberts , Julian Lucek , Mohamed Boucadair , Luis M. Contreras
I-D last updated 2025-04-03 (Latest revision 2025-04-03)
Completed reviews Rtgdir Early review of -02 by Alvaro Retana (diff)
Tsvart Early review of -02 by Yoshifumi Nishida (diff)
Intdir Early review of -02 by Timothy Winters (diff)
Rtgdir IETF Last Call review of -15 by Mike McBride (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -14 by Lars Eggert (diff)
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -16 by Tim Wicinski (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -15 by Joseph A. Salowey (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -16 by Joseph A. Salowey (diff)
Intdir Telechat review of -16 by Timothy Winters (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Timothy Winters
State Completed
Request Telechat review on draft-ietf-teas-5g-ns-ip-mpls by Internet Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/c9hsJpyEywes_FJRAmO5MjxxmhY
Reviewed revision 16 (document currently at 18)
Result Ready
Completed 2025-03-20
review-ietf-teas-5g-ns-ip-mpls-16-intdir-telechat-winters-2025-03-20-00
I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-teas-5g-ns-ip-mpls.
These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area
Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just
like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve
them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more
details on the INT Directorate, see
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/

Summary: There are no Internet area issues that I located in this document. I
previously did an early review of this document (-02).  The document is Ready
for publishing as Informational document.

This document recommends encoding of the IP addressing in section 4.2 and
Appendix A has an IPv6 addressing plan which uses most significant 96-bits to
simplify mapping tables. Section 5.2.1 allows for IPv6 encapsulation using SR6,
so there is no issue with MTU that any encapsulation technique would encounter.
 It uses DSCP for QoS, so there no use of flow labels or additional headers.