Last Call Review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-06
review-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-06-opsdir-lc-korhonen-2014-05-28-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2014-05-26
Requested 2014-05-13
Draft last updated 2014-05-28
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -06 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -07 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Tina Tsou (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -06 by Jouni Korhonen (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Jouni Korhonen
State Completed
Review review-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-06-opsdir-lc-korhonen-2014-05-28
Reviewed rev. 06 (document currently at 08)
Review result Has Nits
Review completed: 2014-05-28

Review
review-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-06-opsdir-lc-korhonen-2014-05-28

I have performed an Operations Directorate review of
	draft-ietf-pce-pcep-inter-domain-p2mp-procedures-06



Sorry for this arriving late.. I do not claim expertise on the specific 


topic this I-D covers, so treat the "substantial comments" according to 


that.




** General:



I found the document sound and well written. Although the writing style 


is referencing related documentation as much as possible without 


repeating any text from them makes the document short, it also makes 


reading the document somewhat a taunting task unless the reader can 


memorize all the related & referenced RFCs. I am not asking anything on 


this regard, just pointing it out.




** Editorials:

Abstract:



o I would expand all non-obvious acronyms and not use acronyms at all 


unless the acronym in already non-expandable 


(

http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt

)




o Section 7.2 bullet 4
  s/step3/step 3

o Section 7.2.
  Acronym S2L has two different expansions "Source-to-Leaf" and
  "Source to Leaf BN". Would be less confusing to use one.

o Section 7.2.
  s/, Etc./, etc.

o Section 7.2:
  Is the "\" in the "\prod" intentional?


** Substantials:

o Section 7.4.1.
  A small nit.. I somehow would like to see this document actually
  showing the value of the new IANA allocated C-bit in the RP
  Object Flag Field. Now there is going to only be a reference to
  the IANA registry.

o Section 7.4.2.
  The I-D references to H-PCE for the dynamic discovery of the
  domain-tree. According to the RFC6805 one valid solution for
  H-PCE PCE child-parent discovery is also static configuration..
  So I might reconsider the word "dynamically" in this section.


** Operationals:

o I actually found it surprising that the document already had put
  thought on the operational and management aspects. Well done ;)

o I would add a note into Section 9 again emphasising the fact that
  preconfiguring and maintaining domain-trees might be a considerable
  administration effort.


- JOuni