[ippm] draft-ippm-ioam-data-09 WGLC comments

[Martin Duke <[e-mail]>]

This document is almost ready. I have a few review comments and a trail of
nits.

Comments:
1. It's RFC Ed policy to have no more than 5 authors, and you have 12.
Please follow these guidelines
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.authlist> to trim the list
down.
2. Throughout the document, there are many lower-case 'must', 'should', or
'may.' These should be reviewed, and most of them changed to upper-case.
Non-upper-case should generally use synonyms like 'might' or 'could'.
3. Section 4.2 says that transit nodes "will update at most one of these
Option Types". I think you mean "at least one of each of these option
types", at least if I'm reading 4.4 correctly.
4. Section 4.4.1 has many normative requirements for the options. What
should transit nodes do if these are not followed (e.g. remainingLen is a
garbage number)? Perhaps there should be an "error flag" in addition to the
Overflow flag?
5. does the pre-allocated option have any sort of initial value the
encapsulation node should set all the trace option data to? Would this
allow the transit nodes to detect if there was a mistake in RemainingLen?

Nits:
Sec 3.
s/using for example packet/using, for example, packet
s/but do not have to share/but do not have to, share
s/data-plane/data planes

Sec 4.3 s/at average/on average

Sec 4.4
s/hardware and software implementations IOAM/hardware and software
implementations, IOAM
s/data.The/data. The
s/devices which either/devices with either

Sec 4.4.1
suggest the sentence
'This bit is set by the network element if there are not enough octets left
to
         record node data, no field is added and the overflow "O-bit"
         must be set to "1" in the IOAM-Trace-Option header.'
be rewritten as
'If there are not enought octets left to record node data, the network
element MUST NOT add a field and MUST set the overflow "O-bit" to "0" in
the IOAM-Trace-Option header.'

s/When set indicates/When set, indicates [multiple times in this section]

Sec 4.4.2
This section could use some subheaders for each node data field

s/hence recommend/and hence RECOMMEND
s/standard unit/standard units

Sec 4.5
Please add a reference for SSSS

Sec 5.3
s/run Linux/run the Linux

Sec 7.8
RFC 8126 says you are supposed to provide guidelines for the expert
reviewer.

-- Martin