[ippm] RtgDir Last Call review: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-conf-state-10

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Tue, 13 December 2022 16:46 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 11:46:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEG8tgpPKpV4V9VA7pbp4Pzp-hg6ahoTZKkjkkPbK+tDdA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "<rtg-ads@ietf.org> (rtg-ads@ietf.org)" <rtg-ads@ietf.org>
Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-conf-state.all@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org, Last Call <last-call@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007ea48f05efb85de5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/5NV8qO4wPix6RcsTdvLhiSK27H4>
Subject: [ippm] RtgDir Last Call review: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-conf-state-10
Precedence: list

Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft.
The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related
drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes
on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to
the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please
see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it
would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last
Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through
discussion or by updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-conf-state-10
Reviewer: Donald Eastlake 3rd
Review Date: 13 December 2022
IETF LC End Date:
Intended Status: Standards Track

*Summary:*
Choose from this list...

   - No issues found. This document is ready for publication.
   - This document is basically ready for publication but has nits that
   should be considered prior to publication.
   - I have some minor concerns about this document that I think should be
   resolved before publication.
   - I have significant concerns about this document and recommend that the
   Routing ADs discuss these issues further with the authors.

*Comments:*

   - Please supply an overview of the draft quality and readability.
   - Include anything else that you think will be helpful toward
   understanding your review.

*Major Issues:*

   - Major issues are the type of concerns that will result in the document
   being blocked until they are resolved. The Routing ADs will become involved.
   - Please include all of the major issues you have found. Give as much
   context information as possible (e.g., section numbers, paragraph counts).
   - If you find no major issues, please write: "No major issues found."

*Minor Issues:*

   - Minor issues are concerns about clarity or technical accuracy that
   should be discussed and resolved before publication, but which would
   normally be resolved between the authors and the reviewers.
   - Please include all of the minor issues you have found. Give as much
   context information as possible (e.g., section numbers, paragraph counts).
   - If you find no minor issues, please write: "No minor issues found."

*Nits:*

Section 1, page 3:
OLD
Furthermore, each IOAM encapsulating node needs to establish NETCONF
Connection with each IOAM transit and IOAM decapsulating node, the
scalability can be an issue. NEW
Furthermore, each IOAM encapsulating node needs to establish a NETCONF
Connection with each IOAM transit and IOAM decapsulating node, so
scalability can be an issue.
Section 1, Page 4/5:
Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

[ippm] RtgDir Last Call review: draft-ietf-ippm-i… Donald Eastlake
Re: [ippm] RtgDir Last Call review: draft-ietf-ip… Donald Eastlake