Last Call Review of draft-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-10
review-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-10-genart-lc-bryant-2017-12-28-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 12)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2017-12-29
Requested 2017-12-15
Draft last updated 2017-12-28
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -06 by Acee Lindem (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -10 by Ron Bonica (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -10 by Stewart Bryant (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -11 by Stewart Bryant (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Stewart Bryant
State Completed
Review review-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-10-genart-lc-bryant-2017-12-28
Reviewed rev. 10 (document currently at 12)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2017-12-28

Review
review-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-10-genart-lc-bryant-2017-12-28

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

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-10
Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review Date: 2017-12-28
IETF LC End Date: 2017-12-29
IESG Telechat date: 2018-01-11

Summary: A clear will written document. Ready for publication.

Major issues: None

Minor issues: Not an issue with the design per se, but there is a school of thought that says do not use all zeros or all ones in a protocol without good reason since these are common uninitialized variable values. If the designers have scope to do so they might consider picking another value.

Nits/editorial comments: 

Slightly strange order of final sections. Most readers will want to look at IANA and Security rather than worrying about the contributors.