Last Call Review of draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-10
review-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-10-secdir-lc-ladd-2018-12-24-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 17)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2018-12-27
Requested 2018-12-13
Draft last updated 2018-12-24
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -08 by Ravi Singh (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -10 by Elwyn Davies (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -10 by Watson Ladd (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -11 by Elwyn Davies (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Watson Ladd
State Completed
Review review-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-10-secdir-lc-ladd-2018-12-24
Reviewed rev. 10 (document currently at 17)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2018-12-24

Review
review-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-10-secdir-lc-ladd-2018-12-24

Dear all,

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's 
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the 
IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the 
security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat 
these comments just like any other last call comments.

The summary of the review is READY.

This is a document in an area I know almost nothing about. It appears
to be about an internal mechanism for configuring label based routing
in an optical network to minimize the number of optical to electrical
transitions along the route. I am perhaps a bit confused as to why the
PCC would specify the constraints on wavelengths on hops that are not
the end ones: if the packets must flow from A to B, shouldn't the PCE
be the one to decide how to do that using all the resources available? 

Merry Christmas!

Sincerely,
Watson Ladd