[Idr] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-23: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis-23: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-rfc5575bis/



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

Thank you for the work put into this document. The document is clear, easy to
read (I appreciated the given examples).

Alas, due to overload of work, I had only a quick browse through the document
with specific focus points and found nothing EXCEPT why having two different
documents ? One for IPv4 (with the core elements of the protocol) and one for
IPv6 (with only the IPv6 specifics)... I am more than surprized to say the
least... hence my DISCUSS...

This blocking DISCUSS can easily be fixed: e.g., with a RFC Editor note to make
a cluster of this document and draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6 so that they are
published together with adjacent RFC numbers. Merging the two documents would
be preferred but I understand that this is more work (albeit a missed
opportunity).

Please find below a couple on non-blocking COMMENTs.

I hope that this helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric


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

I also second Erik K.'s comment on non-TCP/UDP ports.