[RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-05

Victoria Pritchard <pritchardv0@gmail.com> Thu, 27 July 2017 21:31 UTC

Return-Path: <pritchardv0@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA82F1321C1; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:31:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.448
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e_bG5dByQN9l; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:31:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x234.google.com (mail-yw0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::234]) (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 887C913178D; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x234.google.com with SMTP id l82so55726882ywc.2; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Q8h2uD62tRNxvegej+6YTqMGD0Ptv1ckabyvVRmVvj8=; b=fxZYlVDDzu2IPGEPgGD/zQsffVX/AVxJd+Vt7PbFujif620bt02O5jJs+okUicwhj3 5M5tqTJJs/haw9r5VkmIR2Gv9pQ0cq1CyVVEEVifW3ZkgB/A9490KjM5z4QkFBJgT5Mv Ipt5NJst5ayxm90oFrYoWOL9ljq2uAlnFfefMbTpPfUrniUbBmMn8wFIJurnULJKLk5a NECFzUYlqicTlLRYFKnjrD3D5vHdYUu2IENXg0U2mpWie/zyN+A5LqEWHZYPJdgFlrpE tZ3w7b7IdpH5fqvbY+zAFfzx5P8B1unnpT8lUBbEgaz6k3yqT2L5+8jXOKhT+49zabwC vxYw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Q8h2uD62tRNxvegej+6YTqMGD0Ptv1ckabyvVRmVvj8=; b=p/lxKZK4rRE1NrGr+Z5baWrpoatNoEjAZF1HOimzTMArPxK3L6XLreYlD4GeOf9wqB KZ46dN0l4N/hwZaEmw4HD/ON+aGOIUgMfZqKeCCr3YizSDfkJj80VnFNV4setVVEKhCe DKr/CGrZFAE1r3M0niZfIAd+ryNhqS4UM/mtHk5aC1+KUdxftqfZpI/LQG0Y7hIwrTCF RRBNnJAlxgYPZ0IsNG2AKhz/HpuCLYc7nkeXGmFqsyECrVEF25uvz/dcLsyyoJBvY7uj YEMZZewUrkeLD9AbNN2a80p0i3PW2EID5ZcW+TXOv9Cc9ahbSZl/KW2+0qRlM+zN0qph FgvQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw111Kq3mdu9fYUQi//rE7lQG0FViMnVn6ImYOngfSm90ki4tdMj/I DkHGqIaXM4eflQPsbex4vmHY20sjHkRJ
X-Received: by with SMTP id e124mr4680712ybe.76.1501191083692; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Victoria Pritchard <pritchardv0@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 22:31:23 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+fLEhKhbArzJfzmPEYULFN5_EAk3_aG044eWy4eytqb_0SdRQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: rtg-ads@ietf.org
Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec.all@ietf.org, teas@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1143e306489dc8055553494b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dir/nx_gQZznBlwu-fxnG77UtCvycr8>
Subject: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-05
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
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: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 21:31:30 -0000


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-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-05
Reviewer: Victoria Pritchard
Review Date: 27/07/2017
IETF LC End Date:
Intended Status: Standards Track


This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be considered prior to publication.


The draft is well written and really clear to read, although contains some
language which does not read as formally as I would expect from a standards
track document, especially in the appendix.

*Major Issues:*

No major issues found.

*Minor Issues:*

No minor issues found.


Section 2.2 "MUST act as if the all the Path" contains an extra "the".

Section 2.3 "RSVP- TE control plane congestion" has an extra space after

Also, I'm not sure a sentence should start with "And".

Section 2.3.2 "it is risky to assume" - would it be better to say MUST NOT
assume, or SHOULD NOT assume?

Appendix - after stating the default value, would help to separate the
explanation using either a full stop or a new line.

"sort of analogous", "same ballpark", "nicely matches up", "about 30 (31.5
to be precise)" seemed strange phrases to use and could be reworded to be
more formal.