Telechat Review of draft-ietf-taps-minset-10
review-ietf-taps-minset-10-rtgdir-telechat-niven-jenkins-2018-09-19-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-taps-minset |
|---|---|---|
| Requested rev. | no specific revision (document currently at 11) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | Routing Area Directorate (rtgdir) | |
| Deadline | 2018-09-20 | |
| Requested | 2018-08-31 | |
| Requested by | Alvaro Retana | |
| Authors | Michael Welzl, Stein Gjessing | |
| Draft last updated | 2018-09-19 | |
| Completed reviews |
Opsdir Last Call review of -10 by Linda Dunbar
(diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Yaron Sheffer (diff) Genart Last Call review of -06 by Robert Sparks (diff) Rtgdir Telechat review of -10 by Ben Niven-Jenkins (diff) Genart Telechat review of -08 by Robert Sparks (diff) |
|
| Comments | Please review with a focus on the transmission of routing data between nodes. |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Ben Niven-Jenkins |
| State | Completed | |
| Review | review-ietf-taps-minset-10-rtgdir-telechat-niven-jenkins-2018-09-19 | |
| Reviewed rev. | 10 (document currently at 11) | |
| Review result | Has Issues | |
| Review completed: | 2018-09-19 |
Review
review-ietf-taps-minset-10-rtgdir-telechat-niven-jenkins-2018-09-19
Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-ietf-taps-minset-10.txt Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins Review Date: 19 September 2018 Intended Status: Informational Summary: I have some minor concerns about this document that I think should be resolved before publication. Comments: The document contains lots of interesting information that is well articulated and very readable, however it is not clear who the intended audience for the document is and what that audience is expected to do with the information in the document. Major Issues: No major issues found. Minor Issues: It is not clear to me what the purpose of the document is, who the document is aimed at and what the document's relationship is to other TAPS document. For example, if I am an implementer of a transport system, should I read this document because it will aid my implementation, or should I read it if I am interested in why I am expected to implement certain things, etc? I think an additional paragraph should be added to the introduction to clarify the above along the lines of "This document describes ..." and/or "This document is intended to be read by ..." Ben