[Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-teas-native-ip-scenarios-08

[Olivier Bonaventure via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Reviewer: Olivier Bonaventure
Review result: Not Ready

This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
discussion list for information.

When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
[e-mail] if you reply to or forward this review.

This draft is an unusual draft since it describes simulation results for a
technology that is described in other drafts. From the transport area
viewpoint, I do not see any specific point to report about this draft.

However, as a researcher with some knowledge of traffic engineering techniques,
I'm surprised by the content of the draft. It is unusual for the IETF to
publish drafts that describe simulation results. Such results are typically
presented at scientific conference or published in journals and are
peer-reviewed. Unfortunately, this draft does not provide results that validate
the performance of the proposed technique from a traffic engineering viewpoint.

I have two main concerns about the overall content of the draft.

First, there is no discussion on how the proposed technique would react to link
or node failures although these events are key in many networks.

Second, there is no detailed explanation on how the simulation has been
conducted in terms of traffic matrix, link capacities, ... The graphs provide a
comparison between OSPF and the proposed solution, but the draft does not
explain how the OSPF weights have been computed while there are many techniques
in the literature and in production networks that tune the OSPF weights for
traffic engineering purposes. Ignoring these existing techniques is misleading.

I do not consider that this draft brings useful information about the
technology described in the companion documents.