IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tvr-requirements-07
review-ietf-tvr-requirements-07-tsvart-lc-kuehlewind-2026-02-06-00

This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
discussion list for information.

When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
tsv-art@ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.

There are no direct transport issues identified in this document. One point,
that might be missing or is only briefly mentioned in section 3.1 point 3 that
notes change frequency and costs, is the signal load on the network/system that
frequency schedule updates might cause. However, maybe such a discussion is not
in scope for this document?

Otherwise I have some minor, editorial comments/nits that you may or may not
want to address:

1) In the abstract, this sentence is not clear to me:

“This document introduces requirements where TVR computations could
   improve message exchange in a network.”

MAYBE

“This document introduces requirements for the design and implementation of
systems which perform TVR computations in order to improve message exchange in
a network.”

?

2) As section 2.4 basically also contains the definition of TVR, I think it
would have been easier for me to read the document if section 2.4. would be at
the start of section 2. But I guess that a matter of taste.

Nits

1) In Section 2.1.2
OLD
Extrinsic Schedule:  In this situation, the schedule is not part of
      the managed data proper

NEW
Extrinsic Schedule:  In this situation, the schedule is not part of
      the managed data model

2) Section 2.1.4 (and 4.1)
While you always use Agent with an upper A; you write manager with a lower m
(which it used with an upper M in the definitions). Is that intentional?