[bess] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Lars Eggert via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 03 October 2023 07:44 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2A55C151556; Tue, 3 Oct 2023 00:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Lars Eggert via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage@ietf.org, bess-chairs@ietf.org, bess@ietf.org, matthew.bocci@nokia.com, matthew.bocci@nokia.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 11.12.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-ID: <169631909478.11936.12621636406114854599@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2023 00:44:54 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/517V9IxAMwCBC7VCYQQhMskwudo>
Subject: [bess] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-15: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess/>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2023 07:44:54 -0000

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-15: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

# GEN AD review of draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-15

CC @larseggert

Thanks to Dan Romascanu for the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/1wTFLnMrWOSsJrziXpMDBcyv6GM).

## Discuss

### Boilerplate

Document has an IETF Trust Provisions (TLP) Section 6.c(i) Publication
Limitation clause. This means it can in most cases not be a WG document.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

## Comments

### Section 10.1, paragraph 1
```
     [BCP195]  RFC8996, RFC9325.
```
Not really acceptable as a normative reference.

### Missing references

No reference entries found for these items, which were mentioned in the text:
`[RFC8388]`, `[RFC6514]`, `[RFC7988]`, and `[RFC6513]`.

### Inclusive language

Found terminology that should be reviewed for inclusivity; see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/part2/#inclusive_language for background and more
guidance:

 * Terms `traditionally` and `traditional`; alternatives might be `classic`,
   `classical`, `common`, `conventional`, `customary`, `fixed`, `habitual`,
   `historic`, `long-established`, `popular`, `prescribed`, `regular`,
   `rooted`, `time-honored`, `universal`, `widely used`, `widespread`
 * Terms `natively` and `native`; alternatives might be `built-in`,
   `fundamental`, `ingrained`, `intrinsic`, `original`

## Nits

All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there
will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
did with these suggestions.

### Boilerplate

Document still refers to the "Simplified BSD License", which was corrected in
the TLP on September 21, 2021. It should instead refer to the "Revised BSD
License".

There is other outdated content in the boilerplate.

### Uncited references

Uncited references: `[MEF70.1]`.

### Outdated references

Document references `draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement-26`, but
`-30` is the latest available revision.

### Grammar/style

#### Section 3.1.3, paragraph 5
```
uthorized to communicate with a small number of other SD-WAN edge nodes. In t
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
Specify a number, remove phrase, use "a few", or use "some". (Also elsewhere.)

#### Section 6.2.2, paragraph 6
```
 March 2004. [RFC3947] T. Kivinen, et al, "Negotiation of NAT Traversal in t
                                   ^^^^^
```
A period is misplaced or missing. (Also elsewhere.)

#### Section 6.2.2, paragraph 9
```
ov 2021. 11. Acknowledgments Acknowledgements to Andrew Alston, Adrian Farre
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
Do not mix variants of the same word ("acknowledgement" and "acknowledgment")
within a single text.

## Notes

This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
[`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT].

[ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
[ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
[IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool