[spring] review of draft-tgraf-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type-01

["Aitken, Paul" <[e-mail]>]

Thomas, here's some feedback about draft-tgraf-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type-01 :


Since Figure 1 is intended to update the "IPFIX Information Element #46" 
SubRegistry, it should contain the same columns as that registry - ie, 
Value, Description, Reference.

The ElementID, Abstract Data Type, and Data Type Semantics are already 
defined in the "IPFIX Information Elements" registry; they are not 
pertinent here.

So Figure 1 should be:

       -------------------------------------------
       |Value|      Description      | Reference |
       |-----------------------------------------|
       |TBD1 | IS-IS Segment Routing |  RFC8667  |
       |-----------------------------------------|
       |TBD2 | OSPF Segment Routing  |  RFC8665  |
       -------------------------------------------


If the draft is to be accepted by IANA then it needs to be published or 
archived somewhere, since RFC 7012 (and RFC 5102) say:

     The specification of new MPLS label types MUST be published using a
     well-established and persistent publication medium.


"not believed" in section 3 is not rigorous; the statement must be 
definite - eg "This document does not add any additional IPFIX security 
considerations.", or "The same security considerations apply as for the
IPFIX Protocol [RFC7012]."


Surely many of the Normative references are simply Informative? eg 
I-D.ali-spring-sr-traffic-accounting, RFC4364, RFC5036, RFC8277, 
RFC8660, RFC8665, RFC8667.


Typo: "laveraged" in the second paragraph of section 1.


P.