[Bier] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-bier-tether-05

Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 28 February 2024 09:08 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: bier@ietf.org
Delivered-To: bier@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46149C14F6F7; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 01:08:56 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: ops-dir@ietf.org
Cc: bier@ietf.org, draft-ietf-bier-tether.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, dromasca@gmail.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 12.6.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <170911133627.36197.5642079506204786483@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 01:08:56 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/-H31I5azvlvjD_WCcACfCRkfiYo>
Subject: [Bier] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-bier-tether-05
X-BeenThere: bier@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
List-Id: "\"Bit Indexed Explicit Replication discussion list\"" <bier.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bier/>
List-Post: <mailto:bier@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 09:08:56 -0000

Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
Review result: Not Ready

This is the OPS-DIR review of draft-ietf-bier-tether-05. This document
specifies optional procedures to optimize the handling of Bit Index Explicit
Replication (BIER) incapable routers, by attaching (tethering) a BIER router to
a BIER incapable router. The document is quite clear in its scope and
definition of the core functionality that is being added.However, this being a
Standards Track document that extends an existing protocol, I believe that from
an operational and manageability perspective it lacks any information. I
believe that these should be included, either explicitly or by reference,
possibly in an 'Operational and Manageability Considerations' section. See RFC
5706 for guidelines about the information that could be relevant.