[bess] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-bess-bgp-srv6-args-06

Joe Clarke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Sun, 16 March 2025 08:25 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org
Delivered-To: bess@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from [10.244.8.216] (unknown [104.131.183.230]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A3D0C130FC; Sun, 16 Mar 2025 01:25:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Joe Clarke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: ops-dir@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 12.37.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <174211354399.141962.10858536362796685879@dt-datatracker-5b9b68c5b6-zxk6z>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2025 01:25:44 -0700
Message-ID-Hash: 56XTAJWOU6NYWF5RNZZ2LRXTDF3HSBXM
X-Message-ID-Hash: 56XTAJWOU6NYWF5RNZZ2LRXTDF3HSBXM
X-MailFrom: noreply@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-bess.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: bess@ietf.org, draft-ietf-bess-bgp-srv6-args.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Reply-To: Joe Clarke <jclarke@cisco.com>
Subject: [bess] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-bess-bgp-srv6-args-06
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/RDYnNYRV6ANVOToUVYIxVJrwPX0>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:bess-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:bess-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:bess-leave@ietf.org>

Reviewer: Joe Clarke
Review result: Has Nits

I have been asked to review this draft on behalf of the OPS directorate.  This
draft updates RFC9252 to add clarity for processing SRv6 SID advertisements for
SRv6 endpoint behaviors that support arguments.  From an OPS perspective, I
think this document is ready.  I particularly appreciated the call to log
likely config errors to aid with troubleshooting.  The additional examples were
also helpful.

Overall, I only found two small nits.  In Section 3:

s/The procedures in this document remains/The procedures in this document
remain/

And in Section 4:

s/the alternative method specified in document/the alternative method specified
in this document/