Early Review of draft-ietf-6man-default-iids-15
review-ietf-6man-default-iids-15-intdir-early-korhonen-2016-11-30-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-6man-default-iids
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 16)
Type Early Review
Team Internet Area Directorate (intdir)
Deadline 2016-10-20
Requested 2016-10-06
Other Reviews Secdir Last Call review of -16 by Charlie Kaufman
Genart Last Call review of -16 by Roni Even
Opsdir Last Call review of -16 by Sarah Banks
Review State Completed
Reviewer Jouni Korhonen
Review review-ietf-6man-default-iids-15-intdir-early-korhonen-2016-11-30
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/geeHWWCYYckChbTdhZhy2ZW5ejc
Reviewed rev. 15 (document currently at 16)
Review result Ready
Draft last updated 2016-11-30
Review completed: 2016-11-30

Review
review-ietf-6man-default-iids-15-intdir-early-korhonen-2016-11-30

I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-6man-default-iids- 15. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more details on the INT Directorate, see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate.html.

Document: draft-ietf-6man-default-iids- 15
Reviewer: Jouni Korhonen
Review Date: 10/12/2016
IETF LC End Date: --
IESG Telechat date:  --

Summary: Ready for publication.

Major issues: None

Minor issues: 

o The I-D updates RFC4291. Now that there is RFC4291bis work ongoing in 6man how that should be handled? I would assume this document should actually reference to 4291bis instead of 4291?

Other comments:

This document was good read. Nothing to complain. I did review older version -15. What I checked -16 did not change anything that would affect this review. The IDnits complains quite a bit. However, those are bogus errors that IDnits finds.