Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tvr-use-cases-04
review-ietf-tvr-use-cases-04-tsvart-lc-scharf-2024-02-08-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-tvr-use-cases |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 09) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | Transport Area Review Team (tsvart) | |
Deadline | 2024-02-15 | |
Requested | 2024-02-01 | |
Authors | Edward J. Birrane , Nicolas Kuhn , Yingzhen Qu , Rick Taylor , Li Zhang | |
I-D last updated | 2024-02-08 | |
Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -04
by Behcet Sarikaya
(diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Sean Turner (diff) Tsvart Last Call review of -04 by Michael Scharf (diff) Intdir Telechat review of -05 by Pascal Thubert (diff) Iotdir Telechat review of -07 by Charles E. Perkins (diff) Secdir Telechat review of -05 by Sean Turner (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Michael Scharf |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-tvr-use-cases by Transport Area Review Team Assigned | |
Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/Fp8na3LsYmn4G8e7wH6jVzB4Bfs | |
Reviewed revision | 04 (document currently at 09) | |
Result | Ready w/issues | |
Completed | 2024-02-08 |
review-ietf-tvr-use-cases-04-tsvart-lc-scharf-2024-02-08-00
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. This informational document introduces Time-Variant Routing Use Cases. The text is well-written and easy to read. Most of the use cases are fairly obvious. In any case, there are no specific TSV-ART issues, i.e., problems related to Internet transport protocols. Yet, more in general, I don't understand why Section 6 is included in this document. This section may easily become outdated by other documents and future RFCs. Its content is also neither mentioned in the title nor introduced in the abstract. The whole section 6 could just be removed without any impact on the remaining parts of the document.