Re: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-intarea-provisioning domains

[Martin Duke <[e-mail]>]

sending it to the area this time..

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 4:52 PM Martin Duke <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Reviewer: Martin Duke
> Review result: 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 document is ready, and well-written. The examples were especially
> helpful in following how things fit together. There aren't any specific
> transport layer considerations that must be addressed to move forward;
> however, this mechanism is partly intended to support multihomed
> transports, and it is not difficult to imagine extensions that would help
> those transports by providing additional information about each path. I
> hope these eventually follow in another document.
>
> Nits:
> - Second sentence of Sec 3: delete either "which" or "that"
> - Sec 3.1 RA Message Header description: clarify that non-zero checksums
> "MUST be ignored by the receiver and the rest of the option processed", if
> that is in fact accurate.
> - Sec 3.1 it might be helpful to spell out RDNSS the first time the
> acronym appears.
> - Sec 5.2. Can you add a sentence on why sending two RA messages is
> RECOMMENDED?
>
> Martin
>
>