[Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-fecframe-ext-04

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Wed, 19 September 2018 12:34 UTC

Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
X-Original-To: tsv-art@ietf.org
Delivered-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88B45130FE9; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 05:34:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
To: <tsv-art@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-tsvwg-fecframe-ext.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.84.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <153736046133.21524.14459875042120759509@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 05:34:21 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/ODqLdueDi53scDMJ1QlETQT3UOg>
Subject: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-fecframe-ext-04
X-BeenThere: tsv-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Transport Area Review Team <tsv-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsv-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsv-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 12:34:27 -0000

Reviewer: Colin Perkins
Review result: Ready

I've reviewed this document 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 for
their information and to allow them to address any issues raised. When done at
the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this review together
with any other last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
tsv-art@ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.

The document extends the FEC framework to add sliding window codes in addition
to the previously supported block codes. This changes the amount the FEC
generated, and when it is generated, but doesn't make fundamental changes to
the framework. As such, I don't believe there are any new transport issues
raised when compared to the existing FEC framework of RFC 6363.

Colin