Early Review of draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-04

Request Review of draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 09)
Type Early Review
Team Internet Area Directorate (intdir)
Deadline 2017-09-22
Requested 2017-09-08
Requested by Suresh Krishnan
Authors Rolf Winter, Michael Faath, Fabian Weisshaar
Draft last updated 2017-09-24
Completed reviews Iotdir Early review of -04 by Nancy Cam-Winget (diff)
Intdir Early review of -04 by Carlos Bernardos (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -05 by Vincent Roca (diff)
Rtgdir Telechat review of -05 by Carlos Pignataro (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -07 by Vincent Roca (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Carlos Bernardos
State Completed
Review review-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-04-intdir-early-bernardos-2017-09-24
Reviewed rev. 04 (document currently at 09)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2017-09-24


The document is well written and clear to follow. I have not found any major issue. I have some recommendations/questions for the authors:

* Page 3: RFC 7919 --> RFC 7819.

* It would be good to have a section (maybe an annex) in which authors describe the differences (if any) found in the experiments performed with IPv4 vs IPv6. Since IPv6 does not do broadcast, there may be important differences to highlight.

* While I understand that the authors do not provide details about the apps analyzed, it would be good to include more information for example about the distribution of the frequency of broadcast/multicast messages found in the experiments. And it would also be nice (though I don't know if this would be feasible) to provide some recommended values for the frequencies to use (an app developer could benefit from some additional guidelines).

* Page 5: "In that respect broadcast can be [...]" --> "In that respect, multicast can be [...]" or "In that respect, broadcast/multicast can be [...]". Note that the examples used are IPv6, so "broadcast" alone would not apply.