Re: [Idr] Shpehrd of draft-ietf-idr-rfc8203bis-04.txt

Re: [Idr] Shpehrd of draft-ietf-idr-rfc8203bis-04.txt - shepherd review

"Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com> Thu, 12 September 2019 07:36 UTC

From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
To: idr@ietf.org
References: <015c01d56939$ef3dba30$cdb92e90$@ndzh.com>
In-Reply-To: <015c01d56939$ef3dba30$cdb92e90$@ndzh.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 03:36:47 -0400
Message-ID: <016f01d5693c$d56a85e0$803f91a0$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0170_01D5691B.4E5AE1B0"
Thread-Index: AQEtJs1ll5lmxAiLb5Irz5kZ645hDKh4KWnA
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/hloY9nPw5HT_PydbyMj9a9KGxos>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Shpehrd of draft-ietf-idr-rfc8203bis-04.txt - shepherd review
Precedence: list

In double checking the shepherd statement, it appears you must make one
other change:

 

Required change: 

 

Question from shepherd's report: 

 

Are those RFCs listed on the title page header, listed

in the abstract, and discussed in the introduction?  

 

You have listed updating RFC4486 and obsoleting RFC8203 in the 

Abstract.  You have discussed updating RFC4486 in the introduction. 

You have not discussed obsoleting RFC8203 in the introduction. 

 

Therefore I believe you must add this to the introduction paragraph. 

 

Old text: 
       /This document

   updates [RFC4486 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4486> ] by specifying a
mechanism to transmit a short

   freeform UTF-8 [RFC3629 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3629> ] message
as part of a Cease NOTIFICATION

   message [RFC4271 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4271> ] to inform the
peer why the BGP session is being

   shutdown or reset./

New Text:/ This document

   updates [RFC4486 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4486> ] by specifying a
mechanism to transmit a short

   freeform UTF-8 [RFC3629 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3629> ] message
as part of a Cease NOTIFICATION

   message [RFC4271 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4271> ] to inform the
peer why the BGP session is being

   shutdown or reset. This document obsoletes [RFC8203]. /

 

Thank you, Sue   

 

 

 

From: Susan Hares [mailto:shares@ndzh.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2019 3:02 AM
To: idr@ietf.org
Cc: 'John Scudder'; 'Job Snijders'
Subject: Shpehrd of draft-ietf-idr-rfc8203bis-04.txt 

 

Job, Jacob, John,  Alex: 

 

I have reviewed draft-ietf-ider-rfc8203bis-04.txt in preparation 

For sending this document to the IESG for publication.  

I've included my comments in two forms: 

Required Changes and Editorial suggestions. 

 

I've asked for OPS-DIR and RTG-DIR early review of 

this draft.    Please consider submitting the required 

text changes in a -05.txt version so the 

early reviews can move swiftly. 

 

Susan Hares 

--------------------

 

Shepherd's Required Changes prior to submission: 

 

IN section: 5.  IANA Considerations 

 

Old:  /Cease Notification message subcodes/

New: /BGP Cease NOTIFICATION message subcodes/

 

Why: registry name at: 

https://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xhtml#bgp-par
ameters-83

is incorrectly provided in the text. 

 

Shepherd's Editorial suggestion: 

Location:  Page 3: Section 6 Security considerations

Paragraph 3, last sentence 

 

Text:/ Refer to the
   related considerations in 
[RFC4271 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4271> ] and [RFC4272
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4272> ]./ 

 

I understand why you point to [RFC4272], but what related

considerations are you examining in [RFC4271]. 

 

I suggest adding a section in [RFC4271] that you wish to refer to. 

The form could be 

 

New text:/ Refer to the
   related considerations in 
[RFC4271 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4271> ] (section x.x) and [RFC4272
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4272> ]./

Re: [Idr] Shpehrd of draft-ietf-idr-rfc8203bis-04… Susan Hares
Re: [Idr] Shpehrd of draft-ietf-idr-rfc8203bis-04… Susan Hares