[RTG-DIR] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf-10

Dhruv Dhody via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 26 April 2022 14:03 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 8FFB8C07061E; Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:03:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Dhruv Dhody via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: rtg-dir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, lisp@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 8.0.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <165098180257.525.977533583517805963@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 07:03:22 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/dyyZftoyWWdigRMJlhkcjbGz7oM>
Subject: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf-10
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 14:03:22 -0000

Reviewer: Dhruv Dhody
Review result: Has Issues

I was assigned the reviewer today. I noticed that the IESG ballot is done and
the document is approved, I am not sure how valuable this review would be but
anyways...

Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The
Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as
they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special
request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs.
For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
​http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would
be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call
comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by
updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf
Reviewer: Dhruv Dhody
Review Date: 2022-04-26
IETF LC End Date: Over
Intended Status: Experimental

Summary:
I have some minor concerns about this document that I think should be resolved
before publication.

Comments:
- The document is simple, clear and straightforward.

Major Issues:
- No major issues found.

Minor Issues:
- Is there any padding requirement that should be mentioned for the Internal
format in alignment with the rest of LISP? - Consider if adding an example in
the appendix would be useful for a casual reader.

Nits:
- LISP does not have a * next to it at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt and thus should be
expanded on first use!

Thanks!
Dhruv