[Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation-18

[Christer Holmberg via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
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-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation-18
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review Date: 2022-10-04
IETF LC End Date: 2022-10-04
IESG Telechat date: 2022-10-20

Summary:

Since the topic is outside the area of my expertise, I have no technical
comments. I do think the document is a little difficult to read. Below I have a
couple of editorial comments, and I think addressing those could improve the
readability of the document.

Major issues: N/A

Minor issues: N/A

Nits/editorial comments:

Q1:

In my opinion the Introduction section is too long, and goes into too many
details. There are also things which I don't think belong to the Introduction.

For example, I don't think the text in Section 1.1 belongs to the Introduction,
and is not needed in order to get an overview of the mechanism. I think it
belongs to a separate section (perhaps an Appendix). The same applies to
Section 1.3.

Similarly, Section 1.2 seems to talk about alternative solutions, before the
solution in the draft has been clearly explained. I think it should be a
separate section, later in the document.

Q2:

It is quite difficult to get a picture of how the mechanism work. There are no
examples, or step-by-step functionality/use-case descriptions. Also, Section
3.1 seems to be a mixture of architecture and functionality, which is a little
confusing.