Last Call Review of draft-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework-09

Request Review of draft-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 11)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2017-10-02
Requested 2017-09-18
Authors Anoop Ghanwani, Linda Dunbar, Mike McBride, Vinay Bannai, Ramki Krishnan
Draft last updated 2017-10-04
Completed reviews Tsvart Last Call review of -09 by Colin Perkins (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -09 by Tianran Zhou (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -09 by Carl Wallace (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -09 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Tsvart Telechat review of -11 by Colin Perkins
Assignment Reviewer Christer Holmberg 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework-09-genart-lc-holmberg-2017-10-04
Reviewed rev. 09 (document currently at 11)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2017-10-04


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


Document: draft-ietf-nvo3-mcast-framework-09
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review Date: 2017-10-04
IETF LC End Date: 2017-10-02
IESG Telechat date: 2017-10-12

Summary: The document is almost ready for publication, but there are a few issues that I'd like the authors to address.

Major issues: N/A

Minor issues:

The Introduction says that the document "provides a framework". I guess it depends on how you define "framework", but to me it seems like the document only evaluates and discusses different mechanisms - which the text also says.

Nits/editorial comments: 

The Abstract says: "This document discusses a framework of supporting..."

Assuming the document actually does provide a framework (see Q1), I would suggest to say "provides" (which you also use in the Introduction) instead of "discusses".

The Introduction says: "Network virtualization using Overlays over Layer 3 (NVO3) is a Technology... "

Please add a reference to RFC 7365 and/or RFC 8014 on the first occurrence of NVO3.

I don't think the last paragraph of the Introdution (Section 1) belongs to the Introduction. It should be in a terminology section. In addition, I don't think you need to say that "the user is assumed to be familiar with...". You should simply reference the RFCs for the terminology used in the document.