[Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-raw-use-cases-07

Stewart Bryant via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 06 October 2022 18:22 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietf.org
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6263AC159A3E; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 11:22:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Stewart Bryant via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-raw-use-cases.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, raw@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 8.17.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <166508056439.31054.11960388638632865755@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2022 11:22:44 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/S8vvqdivEXol1XNxN3p2Ax__K8s>
Subject: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-raw-use-cases-07
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2022 18:22:44 -0000

Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review result: Ready

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

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-raw-use-cases-07
Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review Date: 2022-10-06
IETF LC End Date: 2022-10-06
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary:

A well written document ready for publication, but note the question on whether
the aero terminology is correct and the comment on haptics.

Major issues:
None

Minor issues:
   Different safety levels need to be supported, from extremely safety
   critical ones requiring low latency, such as a WAKE warning - a
   warning that two aircraft come dangerously close to each other
SB> Is this term correct?
SB> Aircraft proximity is, I think, an AIRPROX event. WAKE I thought applied to
the vortex trails whereby a large aircraft disturbs the air in a way that makes
it unsafe for a smaller aircraft to fly through. It would be useful if an aero
specialist validated the term.

SB> In all the human interaction examples, I am surprised there is no mention
of haptics. A latency failure in a haptic experience can make the participant
feel nauseous and vomit.

Nits/editorial comments:
None