Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-behave-requirements-update-06

Request Review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-behave-requirements-update
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2016-03-01
Requested 2016-02-03
Authors Reinaldo Penno, Simon Perreault, Mohamed Boucadair, Senthil Sivakumar, Kengo Naito
Draft last updated 2016-03-08
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -06 by Dan Romascanu (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -07 by Dan Romascanu (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Ben Laurie (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -06 by Mahesh Jethanandani (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Mahesh Jethanandani
State Completed
Review review-ietf-tsvwg-behave-requirements-update-06-opsdir-lc-jethanandani-2016-03-08
Reviewed rev. 06 (document currently at 08)
Review result Has Nits
Review completed: 2016-03-08


I have reviewed draft-ietf-tsvwg-behave-requirements-update-07 document as part of the Operational directorate’s ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

Document reviewed:  draft-ietf-tsvwg-behave-requirements-update-07


Ready with a nit.


This document clarifies and updates several requirements of RFC4787, RFC5382, and RFC 5508 based on operational and development experience. As the document states, the focus of the document is NAT44. The intended status of the document is Best Current Practice.

The document provides clarifications and updates to the above stated RFCs. As such it is not defining any new configuration parameters or behavior. At best it describes the expected behavior learnt from years of having deployed the solution. Operators and users of the solution might want to make note of the recommendations in the document. It would be nice, and this is not something against the document itself, to see all the recommendations in one document, rather than the recommendations spread over four documents.

A run of idnits on the document yields one warning:


-- The document seems to contain a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, and may

     have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008.  The

     disclaimer is necessary when there are original authors that you have

     been unable to contact, or if some do not wish to grant the BCP78 rights

     to the IETF Trust.  If you are able to get all authors (current and

     original) to grant those rights, you can and should remove the

     disclaimer; otherwise, the disclaimer is needed and you can ignore this

     comment. (See the Legal Provisions document at

 for more information.)


Mahesh Jethanandani

mjethanandani at