Last Call Review of draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-11
review-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-11-genart-lc-sethi-2020-04-24-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 13)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2020-05-05
Requested 2020-04-20
Authors Xiaohu Xu, Sriganesh Kini, Peter Psenak, Clarence Filsfils, Stephane Litkowski, Matthew Bocci
Draft last updated 2020-04-24
Completed reviews Rtgdir Early review of -08 by Dhruv Dhody (diff)
Rtgdir Last Call review of -12 by Dhruv Dhody (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -12 by Scott Bradner (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -12 by Rich Salz (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -11 by Mohit Sethi (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Mohit Sethi
State Completed
Review review-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-11-genart-lc-sethi-2020-04-24
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/cpGWugPuM1XApMc7-ZkOSXabMRs
Reviewed rev. 11 (document currently at 13)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2020-04-24

Review
review-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-11-genart-lc-sethi-2020-04-24

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-isis-mpls-elc-11
Reviewer: Mohit Sethi
Review Date: 2020-04-24
IETF LC End Date: 2020-05-05
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: This document specifies how Entropy Label Capability (ELC) and Entropy Readable Label Depth (ERLD) are advertised using IS-IS. For advertising ELC, a flag in the Prefix Attribute Flags is used. For advertising ERLD, a Node MSD Advertisement is used. 

Major issues:

Minor issues: The document is short and straightforward. For someone like me who is not familiar with the routing area, would it make sense to explain why signalling ELC information with MPLS is not sufficient (or what are the benefits of advertising with IS-IS)? 

Nits/editorial comments:

In section 3, "used as the ECL  Flag" should perhaps be "used as the ELC Flag"?
In section 4, "IANA for EARLD-MSD" should perhaps be "IANA for ERLD-MSD"?
In section 6, "ECL Flag (E-flag)." should perhaps be "ELC Flag (E-flag)."?