IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Last-Call] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison-02

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Wed, 20 April 2022 12:09 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E1533A0DA6; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 05:09:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JQf4f3K6GFQX; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 05:09:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 823023A0DB4; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 05:09:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:9180:dfcf:fc10:7f39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 97A861DA880; Wed, 20 Apr 2022 15:09:20 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1650456560; bh=LOw3GSjVBblmELWKA7DfwKmGBRLtdvhk3Cmm0jGxiVw=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=Qxms/335zVX6RL2oVCA9ahRl+neGIarPXQtQaJpOY2FQ8wcSgIYEtjk1Hqo472SuK vi6pstxod0uCn5/odUHW4HM+LeiEZWWNtVTLz9B2JWELf/W1SMrPfGsaQdJouUgXy8 N1DJDFxtgMA+9pNDNQdhy8iYk9Xbl5yisi5z2gPQ=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3FB7BDDF-9A6E-4ABE-BF77-57876F61F3B6"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.80.82.1.1\))
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <164734001790.7752.8184734969810572837@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 15:09:19 +0300
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, last-call@ietf.org, v6ops@ietf.org, draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison.all@ietf.org
Message-Id: <3E858791-B7D7-4D97-8CCC-E94825AC3444@eggert.org>
References: <164734001790.7752.8184734969810572837@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: 97A861DA880.A2450
X-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/bDfKz2INpLGC5b7dnE2qBzpDUE8>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison-02
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:09:51 -0000

Dan, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document.

Lars


> On 2022-3-15, at 12:26, Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
> 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-v6ops-transition-comparison-02
> Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> Review Date: 2022-03-15
> IETF LC End Date: 2022-03-18
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> 
> Summary:
> 
> Ready with Nits
> 
> (this review applies to both Gen-ART and OPSDIR.
> 
> This is an informational document reviewing advantages and disadvantages of the
> five most prominent IPv4aaS technologies.
> 
> The document is explicitly targeting network operators, so it is useful and
> recommended that operators dealing with one or more of these technologies or
> evaluating their introduction read it carefully. I liked Section 4.5 which
> includes some very useful Typical Deployment and Traffic Volume Considerations
> and Section 5. Performance Considerations.
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> 1. I am not sure whether this Informational document needs any of the
> capitalized key words as described in BCP14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] mentioned in
> Section 1.1
> 
> 2. Another pass to make sure that acronyms are expanded at first occurrence
> would be useful. For exemple: UE in section 2.1
> 
> 3. It is not clear how Table 2 should be read. What  means an X? I guess it is
> supposed to say 'it applies, no data model' but this should be explained
> 
> 4. Section 4.4.1 - I am slightly uncomfortable with the URLs for free
> open-source implementations being included in the text. Maybe an Appendix would
> be a better place. Or at least use informative references.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email