Skip to main content

Early Review of draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-03
review-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-03-rtgdir-early-patel-2016-05-20-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 13)
Type Early Review
Team Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir)
Deadline 2016-05-20
Requested 2016-04-16
Authors Hao Weiguo , Yizhou Li , Muhammad Durrani , Sujay Gupta , Andrew Qu
I-D last updated 2018-04-12 (Latest revision 2018-01-25)
Completed reviews Rtgdir Early review of -03 by Keyur Patel (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -10 by Francis Dupont (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -10 by Joseph A. Salowey (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -12 by Francis Dupont (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Keyur Patel
State Completed
Request Early review on draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication by Routing Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 03 (document currently at 13)
Result Has nits
Completed 2016-05-20
review-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-03-rtgdir-early-patel-2016-05-20-00

Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The
Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as
they pass through IETF last call and IESG review,
 and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide
 assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing
 Directorate, please see ​

http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

.

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would
be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call
comments that you receive, and strive to resolve
 them through discussion or by updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-05

Reviewer: Keyur Patel

Review Date: 27-Apr-2016

Intended Status: Standards Track

Summary:

The document is well written and seems ready for the publication. No major
issues found. Minor nits are listed below.

Major Issues:

None.

Minor Issues

Intended Status: "Standards Track" Please.

Section 1, 3 paragraph: S/will be described/is described.

Section 11.1, Do you need to define any error conditions where multiple flag
bits are set?

Regards,

Keyur