[Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-vpn-common-06

Wesley Eddy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 30 March 2021 23:50 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.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 C020A3A07C8; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 16:50:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Wesley Eddy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: <tsv-art@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-opsawg-vpn-common.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, opsawg@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.27.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <161714825572.5340.7227743193048443349@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 16:50:55 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/vp3zzNzOTFi1ezJFyKJEZ1DncpM>
Subject: [Tsv-art] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-vpn-common-06
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: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 23:50:56 -0000

Reviewer: Wesley Eddy
Review result: Almost 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
tsv-art@ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.

(1) I noticed in the "qos-classification-policy" there is "l4" support either
TCP or UDP.  It isn't clear if other transport protocols are purposefully not
included.  Should this also support SCTP and/or DCCP, or other transport
protocol numbers in general?  Are the QUIC aspects that might be matched
contained within the UDP fields supported?

(2) Is the allowable MTU another aspect of VPN services that should be able to
be expressed?

(3) ICMP isn't mentioned as an identity type, and I wondered if this should be.