[Int-dir] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum-05

Sheng Jiang via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 20 October 2020 02:58 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: int-dir@ietf.org
Delivered-To: int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9BFE3A1034; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:58:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Sheng Jiang via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: <int-dir@ietf.org>
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum.all@ietf.org, v6ops@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.20.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <160316271478.8259.14048977655674076984@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:58:34 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/6jYNkBMOJ5NuxUZymP3E2G9gDtA>
Subject: [Int-dir] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum-05
X-BeenThere: int-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "This list is for discussion between the members of the Internet Area directorate." <int-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-dir>, <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-dir/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-dir>, <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 02:58:35 -0000

Reviewer: Sheng Jiang
Review result: Ready with Issues

Reviewer: Sheng Jiang
Review result: Ready with Issues


I have reviewed this document as part of the Internet Area directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written with the intent of improving the IETF drafts.

Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews
during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat these
comments just like any other last call comments.


Overall Summary:

This draft is a document that intents to be an Informational  RFC. This
document gives some recommendation to  improve the reaction and performance of
Customer Edge Routers in the IPv6 renumbering events.  It updates RFC7084.

Overall this is a well written document. There is a small Nit: in the
information reference, [I-D.gont-6man-slaac-renum] has been listed twice.

However, I have a more fundamental question. It may be easily addressed by AD
saying it was not an issue: as an informational document, it should only give
information or recommendation to the readers or implementors. However, this
document has a lot of "MUST", which is too strong and I think it should only
appear in Standard Stack or BCP documents. If so, this document may need
revise, even rework in the WG.