Telechat Review of draft-ietf-v6ops-slaac-renum-04

Request Review of draft-ietf-v6ops-slaac-renum
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 05)
Type Telechat Review
Team Internet of Things Directorate (iotdir)
Deadline 2020-10-20
Requested 2020-10-12
Requested by Éric Vyncke
Authors Fernando Gont, Jan Zorz, Richard Patterson
Draft last updated 2020-10-19
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -03 by Klaas Wierenga (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -03 by Dale Worley (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -03 by Jürgen Schönwälder (diff)
Iotdir Telechat review of -04 by Ted Lemon (diff)
Intdir Telechat review of -04 by Sheng Jiang (diff)
I would appreciate a review on this 13-page document keeping in mind the specifics of IoT.
You may want to have the same reviewer for draft-ietf-v6ops-slaac-renum and draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum.
Thank you,
Assignment Reviewer Ted Lemon 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-v6ops-slaac-renum-04-iotdir-telechat-lemon-2020-10-19
Posted at
Reviewed rev. 04 (document currently at 05)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2020-10-19


This draft does a good job of discussing typical home use scenarios, where the problems described in the document are most likely to occur. It might be worth noting that some of the assumptions about prefix stability may not be applicable to commercial IoT deployments. This is relevant because some IoT deployments make use of sleepy devices that may only wake up once per day or even less frequently. The suggested parameters would be inappropriate for such a device. At the same time such a device likely is not relying on RA, since it would not be awake for periodic refreshes. Nevertheless the operational mitigations section could use some additional verbiage about applicability so that readers do not assume that the advice given there is universally applicable.