Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-rfc5798bis-02

Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk> Mon, 06 March 2023 14:59 UTC

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.2\))
From: Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <540A22D7-2A47-448C-934C-80F970FAB398@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2023 14:58:37 +0000
Cc: Routing Directorate <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-rfc5798bis.all@ietf.org, rtgwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1BFBFB07-EA3E-41AB-A8A0-B04148192D55@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
References: <167769809510.59303.10390545853570761040@ietfa.amsl.com> <540A22D7-2A47-448C-934C-80F970FAB398@gmail.com>
To: Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/JICBO53b5OxC-wrWNMDHZqWoios>
Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-rfc5798bis-02
Precedence: list

Perfect, thanks Acee. Ben

> On 2 Mar 2023, at 19:15, Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ben,
> 
> Thanks for the review. I’ll fix both of these in the next revision. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Acee
> 
>> On Mar 1, 2023, at 2:14 PM, Ben Niven-Jenkins via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins
>> Review result: Has Nits
>> 
>> Hello
>> 
>> I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of
>> draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-rfc5798bis-02.
>> 
>> The routing directorate will, on request from the working group chair, perform
>> an “early” review of a draft before it is submitted for publication to the
>> IESG. The early review can be performed at any time during the draft’s lifetime
>> as a working group document. The purpose of the early review depends on the
>> stage that the document has reached.
>> 
>> For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
>> 
>> Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-rfc5798bis-02.txt
>> Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins
>> Review Date: 1st March 2023
>> Intended Status: Standards Track
>> 
>> Summary: This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that
>> should be considered prior to being submitted to the IESG.
>> 
>> The document is well written and understandable.
>> 
>> I have two minor comments that I think should be resolved before it is
>> submitted to the IESG.
>> 
>> 1) Section 1.1 bullet 3 states “Appendices describing operation over legacy
>> technologies (FDDI, Token Ring, and ATM LAN Emulation) were removed.” however
>> the diagrams in Section 4.1 & 4.2 include “Ethernet, Token Ring, or FDDI”.
>> Should the reference to Token Ring & FDDI be also removed from those diagrams?
>> 
>> 2) Section 4.2 states: “In the IPv4 example above, i.e., IPvX is IPv4
>> everywhere in the figure, half of the hosts have configured a static default
>> route through Router-1's IPv4 A, and half are using Router-2's IPv4 B.” (and
>> has similar text in the next paragraph for IPv6), however the diagram shows all
>> hosts with “Default Router IPvX Addresses” of IPvX A, whereas I think the
>> diagram should be showing two of the four hosts with “Default Router IPvX
>> Addresses” of IPvX A and the other two with “Default Router IPvX Addresses” of
>> IPvX B?
>> 
>> Regards
>> Ben
>> 
>> 
>> 
>

[RTG-DIR] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-rtgwg… Ben Niven-Jenkins via Datatracker
Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-r… Acee Lindem
Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-r… Ben Niven-Jenkins