Last Call Review of draft-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-02
review-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-02-opsdir-lc-wu-2015-10-26-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 03)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2015-10-27
Requested 2015-10-19
Draft last updated 2015-10-26
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -02 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -03 by Christer Holmberg
Secdir Last Call review of -02 by Yaron Sheffer (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -02 by Qin Wu (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Qin Wu
State Completed
Review review-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-02-opsdir-lc-wu-2015-10-26
Reviewed rev. 02 (document currently at 03)
Review result Has Nits
Review completed: 2015-10-26

Review
review-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-02-opsdir-lc-wu-2015-10-26






I have reviewed draft-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-02 as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF




documents being processed by the IESG.  These comments were written




with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the IETF




drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included




in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs




should treat these comments just like any other last call comments.




 




Short Summary




This document discusses how batter power constrained device is impacted by large amount of route advertisement and how to alleviate such impact.





 




It is well written and ready for publication. There are no operational or management concerns in this document. Here are a few suggestion and
 editorial comments:







1.

 


Section 4, last bullet:




s/ non-general-purpose/ dedicated







 







2.

 


Section 5.1, bullet 2 said:




“




Administrators of networks that serve large numbers (tens or




hundreds) of battery-powered devices SHOULD enable this




behaviour.




 




”




which behavior should be enabled? “Responding to Router Solicitations




with unicast Router Advertisements” or the behavior described by bullet 1?




Please make this clear.




 







3.

 


Section 5.1, bullet 3:




The word


“

Section

”


repeats twice, it is not necessary.




s/see section Section 4/see Section 4