[Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-23

Erik Kline via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 18 April 2019 02:20 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietf.org
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5B0B120294; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 19:20:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Erik Kline via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: <gen-art@ietf.org>
Cc: lsr@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.95.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Message-ID: <155555401259.21196.3824352311000750590@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 19:20:12 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/A6m__Ux8vKTHS63mLpkXL4-gkGk>
Subject: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-23
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 02:20:13 -0000

Reviewer: Erik Kline
Review result: Ready with Nits

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at


Document: draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-??
Reviewer: Erik Kline
Review Date: 2019-04-17
IETF LC End Date: 2019-04-17
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat


For what little I know of IS-IS and segment routing, this all seems to make
general sense.  I simply had some language/style nits (below).

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

# Section 1

* "SR's control-plane can be applied ..., and do not require...".  It looks
like the subject of the sentence is "control-plane" and so perhaps "do not"
should be "does not".

* s/draft/document/g

# Section 2.1

* "Algorithms identifiers" -> "Algorithm identifiers"

# Section 2.2.2

* Length: variable

Should this say "11-12" (1 + 1 + 6 + 3-4)?

* "set of Adj-SID each router" -> "set of Adj-SIDs each router", perhaps.

# Section 2.3

s/valu eis/value is/

# Section 2.4

Silly, naive question: does the length include the sum of the octets
representing the sub-TLVs?

# Section 2.4.6

In example 3, I would recommend s/0xD/0x0D/ & s/0x0/0x00/ & s/0x1/0x01/ ,
but perhaps that's just a personal readability thing.

# Section 3.3

* "by other components than" -> "by components other than", perhaps.

* "to know what are the local SIDs" -> "to know what the local SIDs are",

* "The SRLB sub-TLV is used for this purpose...", (instead of "that purpose")

* "which mechanisms are outside" -> "which are outside", maybe.

* "the SRLB TLV" -> "the SRLB sub-TLV", I think.