[Teas] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis-04: (with COMMENT)

[Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

# GEN AD review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis-04

CC @larseggert

## Comments

### Section 3.1, paragraph 2
```
      0                   1                   2                   3
      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   Router ID                                     (4 octets)    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   default metric                              | (3 octets)
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |     Flags     |                                 (1 octet)
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |sub-TLVs length|                                 (1 octet)
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
     | sub-TLVs ...                                    (0-246 octets)
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
```
It's somewhat unusual to have a header diagram that doesn't fill its
rows and uses that space to instead define the field length for a
second time (it's already defined by the horizontal space used,
which is why there is bit count at the top.)

### Section 3.3.1, paragraph 4
```
     The remote AS number field has 4 octets.  When only 2 octets are used
     for the AS number, the left (high-order) 2 octets MUST be set to 0.
     The remote AS number sub-TLV MUST be included when a router
     advertises an inter-AS TE link.
```
Would the higher-order octets not be zero anyway if the value is <= 0xffff?

### Section 3.3.4, paragraph 4
```
     If the originating node does not support IPv4, the IPv6 Local ASBR ID
     sub-TLV MUST be present in the inter-AS reachability TLV.  Inter-AS
     reachability TLVs which have a Router ID of 0.0.0.0 and do NOT have
     the IPv6 Local ASBR ID sub-TLV present MUST be ignored.
```
NOT is not an RFC2119 term.

## Nits

All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there
will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
did with these suggestions.

### Grammar/style

#### Section 5, paragraph 5
```
 this document. No additional acknowledgments are made for the new version (
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
Do not mix variants of the same word ("acknowledgment" and "acknowledgement")
within a single text.

## Notes

This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
[`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT].

[ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
[ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
[IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool