Last Call Review of draft-ietf-6tisch-6top-protocol-10
review-ietf-6tisch-6top-protocol-10-genart-lc-carpenter-2018-03-10-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-6tisch-6top-protocol
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 12)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2018-03-26
Requested 2018-02-23
Other Reviews Iotdir Early review of -09 by Alexander Pelov (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -09 by Brian Carpenter (diff)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Brian Carpenter
Review review-ietf-6tisch-6top-protocol-10-genart-lc-carpenter-2018-03-10
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/3Bfh30HFk9UDxV831nYLYJnuk9c
Reviewed rev. 10 (document currently at 12)
Review result Ready
Draft last updated 2018-03-10
Review completed: 2018-03-10

Review
review-ietf-6tisch-6top-protocol-10-genart-lc-carpenter-2018-03-10

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-6tisch-6top-protocol-10
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2018-03-10
IETF LC End Date: 2018-03-26
IESG Telechat date: 2018-04-05

Summary: Ready

Comment: 

Most of my previous comments have been fixed, thanks. I still disagree
with the authors on one point, but not enough to delay the draft:

In section 3.1.1 "2-step 6P Transaction" there seems to be a rare race condition
if A's timeout expires while B's Response is in flight. This will be detected
later as an inconsistency (section 3.4.6.2). The authors don't think it's necessary
to mention this in 3.1.1. IMHO it would be useful to mention. (Similarly for
section 3.1.2, 3-step transaction.)