Covering Prefixes Outbound Route Filter for BGP-4
RFC 7543

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.

(Adrian Farrel) Yes

Comment (2015-03-03 for -04)
No email
send info
Some minor editorial bits and pieces we can pickup after the telechat. (Thanks to Dave Black and Alvaro Retana for the reviews).

---

Something can be added to the Introduction (which is a bit short) to explain what a covering prefix is. Probably breaking the second paragraph after the first sentence and adding a new sentence that begins "A covering prefix is..."

---

The fields in Figures 1 are briefly described after the figure, but in some cases the description is exceeding brief. For example, minlen.

Can you look at the text and see where you can beef it up either with a forward reference to where the field is described, or with a simple statement about what the field is used for.

---

Final paragraph of Section 3

OLD>
   When the ROUTE-REFRESH message includes one or more CP-ORF entries,
   the BGP speaker MUST re-advertise routes that have been affected by
   ORF entries carried by the message.  While the speaker MAY also re-
   advertise the routes that have not been affected by the ORF entries
   carried in the message, this memo RECOMMENDS not to re-advertise the
   routes that have not been affected.
<OLD

NEW> 
   When the ROUTE-REFRESH message includes one or more CP-ORF entries,
   the BGP speaker MUST re-advertise routes that have been affected by
   CP-ORF entries carried by the message.  While the speaker MAY also re-
   advertise the routes that have not been affected by the CP-ORF entries
   carried in the message, it is RECOMMENDED not to re-advertise the
   routes that have not been affected.
<NEW

---

Section 8 has a paragraph that begins  "Section 5…” I think this applies specifically to the first bullet in the list (of two) immediately above. If I'm right, can you move the paragraph into that bullet?

---

Can you move RFC 4364 to be an Informative reference.

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

Comment (2015-03-05 for -04)
No email
send info
The Gen-ART review pointed out that the draft was difficult to read. 

For what it is worth, I found the draft relatively hard to read and I knew much of the terminology already. But I was able to understand what the draft specified. But I think it would be useful make some additional edits along the lines of Adrian’s suggestions or perhaps beyond. One thing that I often find useful is to explain the semantics of a concept or field as early as possible. There were a few cases in this document where you talked about something for a while but it was only clear later what its meaning was. Example: there’s a lot of rules about the minlen field early in the draft, but it is only on page six that the spec actually says what it does. Explaining what it is for would have made understanding easier.

In any case, these are just comments from my perspective. This is a No-Obj position.

(Alia Atlas) No Objection

(Richard Barnes) No Objection

(Spencer Dawkins) No Objection

Comment (2015-03-04 for -04)
No email
send info
I found myself wishing that the Abstract and/or Introduction included a sentence describing what a "covering prefix" was. "ORF" is nicely explained in the Introduction, but all I get on "covering prefix" is that they're applicable in Virtual Hub-and-Spoke VPNs and BGP/MPLS Ethernet VPN networks.

I actually know most of the terms defined in the Terminology section, but "covering prefix" isn't explained there, either. 

The first clue I could find (searching for "cover") is on page 8, in this sentence.

   However, because Loc-RIB also
   contains a more specific covering route (3:192.0.2.0/89),
   2:192.0.2.0/88 does not match.  

I can guess what a covering prefix is using context clues, but I'm guessing.

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

(Brian Haberman) No Objection

Comment (2015-03-04 for -04)
No email
send info
I agree with Adrian's suggestions for this document.  Additionally, I would like to see the acronym RT expanded on first use. While making any other edits, please s/Contstrain/Constrain.

(Joel Jaeggli) No Objection

Barry Leiba No Objection

(Ted Lemon) No Objection

(Kathleen Moriarty) No Objection

(Pete Resnick) No Objection

(Martin Stiemerling) No Objection