Early Review of draft-ietf-intarea-gue-06

Request Review of draft-ietf-intarea-gue
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 09)
Type Early Review
Team Internet Area Directorate (intdir)
Deadline 2019-02-15
Requested 2019-01-29
Requested by Suresh Krishnan
Authors Tom Herbert, Lucy Yong, Osama Zia
Draft last updated 2019-02-28
Completed reviews Intdir Early review of -06 by Charles Perkins (diff)
Tsvart Early review of -07 by David Black (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Charles Perkins 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-intarea-gue-06-intdir-early-perkins-2019-02-28
Reviewed rev. 06 (document currently at 09)
Review result Almost Ready
Review completed: 2019-02-28


This document needs an applicability statement which includes the assumptions and the reasons it might be useful.  Deliverability needs to be expanded.  Reasons why middleboxes would be unlikely inspect GUE fields might be included.

For instance, the discussion in second paragraph of 5.11.1 belongs in the applicability statement.

It should also be explained why arbitrary GUE extensions are less likely to be filtered out compared to IPv6 destination options.
The document assumes close familiarity with deployment scenarios that seem to be characterized by acronyms such as RSS, aRFS, TSO, LRO, etc.  While I am pretty familiar with a lot of encapsulation techniques, I had to study the meaning of these acronyms.  If it is intended to effectively restrict the intended audience, that is O.K., but otherwise more background is needed along with relevant citations.
[GUEEXTENS] is cited in a way that places a normative dependency on [GUEEXTENS].  So, [GUEEXTENS] belongs in the Normative References.
I have a large number of specific comments which I will post shortly in the form of a rfcdiff-generated file.