[RTG-DIR] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bfd-subcode-03

Mohamed Boucadair via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 05 October 2022 07:24 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietf.org
Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A9A3C1524CC; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 00:24:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Mohamed Boucadair via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: rtg-dir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-idr-bfd-subcode.all@ietf.org, idr@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 8.17.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <166495467162.47232.7188267218682354200@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Mohamed Boucadair <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2022 00:24:31 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/MTymh27VWhWxgmCl2V4MzXlwh7A>
Subject: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bfd-subcode-03
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
List-Id: Routing Area Directorate <rtg-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-dir/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2022 07:24:31 -0000

Reviewer: Mohamed Boucadair
Review result: Has Issues

Document: draft-ietf-idr-bfd-subcode-03
Reviewer: Mohamed Boucadair
Review Date: 05/10/2022
IETF LC End Date: N/A
Intended Status: Standards Track

I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of this draft.

# General

The specification is on good track and its core contribution is ready. However,
there are some very few points that I suggest to fix:

## Use consistent terminology (see more in the detailed review provided below)

## Consider adding a pointer to the BGP YANG module as an example to tweak the
associated BFD timers. Likewise, consider listing last-error (YANG) data node
in addition to the MIB mention.

## The Security Considerations Section should ACK at least the dependency on
the BFD to take actions. Manipulating the BFD session will thus have
implications on the BGP connection.

## IANA Considerations: The assignment is currently temporary (as per
https://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xhtml#bgp-parameters-4).
IANA should be requested to make that assignment permanent. I would update the
text accordingly.

## Consider moving at least RFC8538 to be listed as normative.

# Detailed Review:

FWIW, my detailed review can be found at:

* pdf:
https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-ietf-idr-bfd-subcode-03-rev%20Med.pdf
* doc:
https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-ietf-idr-bfd-subcode-03-rev%20Med.doc