Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-lambda-label-04
review-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-lambda-label-04-secdir-lc-wouters-2015-09-10-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-lambda-label
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 05)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2015-09-09
Requested 2015-08-27
Draft last updated 2015-09-10
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -04 by Robert Sparks (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -05 by Robert Sparks
Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Paul Wouters (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -04 by Carlos Pignataro (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Paul Wouters
State Completed
Review review-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-lambda-label-04-secdir-lc-wouters-2015-09-10
Reviewed rev. 04 (document currently at 05)
Review result Has Nits
Review completed: 2015-09-10

Review
review-ietf-ccamp-flexigrid-lambda-label-04-secdir-lc-wouters-2015-09-10

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's 


ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the 


IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the 


security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat 


these comments just like any other last call comments.




The draft is Ready with nits

This document defines a new Flexi-Grid value for Lambda Switch Capable
(LSC) Label Switching Routers. The specification of this new label
references an external (ITU) specification.

The security considerations of this document properly refers to other
documents, such as RFC3471, RFC3473 and RFC5920. No new security issues
are introduced in this document, as it merely defines a new label to use
which causes no backwards compatibility issues.

nits:

 -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may
     have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008.  If you
     have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant
     the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore
     this comment.  If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer.
     (See the Legal Provisions document at
     

http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info

 for more information.)


Paul