Last Call Review of draft-ietf-pim-drlb-13
review-ietf-pim-drlb-13-opsdir-lc-clarke-2019-10-30-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-pim-drlb |
|---|---|---|
| Requested rev. | no specific revision (document currently at 13) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
| Deadline | 2019-11-07 | |
| Requested | 2019-10-24 | |
| Authors | Yiqun Cai, Heidi Ou, Sri Vallepalli, mankamana mishra, Stig Venaas, Andy Green | |
| Draft last updated | 2019-10-30 | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Last Call review of -13 by Ben Niven-Jenkins
Genart Last Call review of -13 by Pete Resnick Secdir Last Call review of -13 by Carl Wallace Tsvart Last Call review of -13 by Michael Scharf Opsdir Last Call review of -13 by Joe Clarke |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Joe Clarke |
| State | Completed | |
| Review | review-ietf-pim-drlb-13-opsdir-lc-clarke-2019-10-30 | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/MG70V3KiwkgFvQWBUHOJKbPRVHk | |
| Reviewed rev. | 13 | |
| Review result | Ready | |
| Review completed: | 2019-10-30 |
Review
review-ietf-pim-drlb-13-opsdir-lc-clarke-2019-10-30
I was asked to review this document on behalf of the ops directorate. This document describes a new protocol to do PIM DR load balancing. In general, I think this document is ready. I appreciate both the backwards compat and operator considerations sections. In fact, as I read through this, I kept thinking, "I hope they talk about legacy vs. new routers on the same shared LAN". One thing that might be good to add is a callout to vendors/implementors that they are explicit in which GDR for which group/source. Thinking with a troubleshooting mind, this changes the paradigm in forwarding and knowing how that behaves will be critical. I also found three really small nits: Section 5.2.1: s/ordinal number of router X/ordinal number of Router X/ === Section 5.4: s/permissable/permissible/ === Section 5.8: s/take part in an load-balancing/take part in load-balancing/