Last Call Review of draft-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-10
review-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-10-genart-lc-bryant-2017-12-28-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 12) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2017-12-29 | |
| Requested | 2017-12-15 | |
| Authors | Xian Zhang , Vishnu Pavan Beeram , Igor Bryskin , Daniele Ceccarelli , Oscar Gonzalez de Dios | |
| I-D last updated | 2017-12-28 | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Last Call review of -06
by Acee Lindem
(diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -10 by Ron Bonica (diff) Genart Last Call review of -10 by Stewart Bryant (diff) Genart Telechat review of -11 by Stewart Bryant (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Stewart Bryant |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Reviewed revision | 10 (document currently at 12) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2017-12-28 |
review-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-10-genart-lc-bryant-2017-12-28-00
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-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-10 Reviewer: Stewart Bryant Review Date: 2017-12-28 IETF LC End Date: 2017-12-29 IESG Telechat date: 2018-01-11 Summary: A clear will written document. Ready for publication. Major issues: None Minor issues: Not an issue with the design per se, but there is a school of thought that says do not use all zeros or all ones in a protocol without good reason since these are common uninitialized variable values. If the designers have scope to do so they might consider picking another value. Nits/editorial comments: Slightly strange order of final sections. Most readers will want to look at IANA and Security rather than worrying about the contributors.