Telechat Review of draft-ietf-dots-requirements-18
review-ietf-dots-requirements-18-genart-telechat-sparks-2019-02-13-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-dots-requirements
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 21)
Type Telechat Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2019-02-19
Requested 2019-02-05
Other Reviews Secdir Last Call review of -16 by Brian Weis (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -16 by Scott Bradner (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -16 by Joseph Touch (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -16 by Robert Sparks (diff)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Robert Sparks
Review review-ietf-dots-requirements-18-genart-telechat-sparks-2019-02-13
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/mDuKc2LHOsjCSQ6-qsG0iKR23is
Reviewed rev. 18 (document currently at 21)
Review result Ready with Issues
Draft last updated 2019-02-13
Review completed: 2019-02-13

Review
review-ietf-dots-requirements-18-genart-telechat-sparks-2019-02-13

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 wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

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

Document: draft-ietf-dots-requirements-18
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date: 2019-02-13
IETF LC End Date: 2018-11-23
IESG Telechat date: 2019-02-21

Summary: Ready, but with a process issue for the shepherd and AD to consider.

This version addressed all of my comments on version -16. Thank you.

However, the diff shows that a large number of SHOULDs were changed to MUSTs. I'm guessing that was in response to a comment in the TSVART review of -16. This large scale substitution makes me worry - are they really the right adjustments? Has the group reviewed and agreed to these normative changes? 

As a nit, I'll note that the additional description of heartbeating creeps into specifying protocol rather than requirements.