Subject: Re: [bess] Francesca Palombini's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-09: (with COMMENT)

From: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 09:10:01 +0000

Hi Francesca,

Thank you very much for reviewing.
John’s review has been addressed in version 10 (hence in version 11 too).
We also reviewed the use of SHOULD again.

I hope the latest version can address your comments.

Thank you.
Jorge

From: Francesca Palombini via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thursday, October 21, 2021 at 2:24 PM
To: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] <[email-masked]>, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <[email-masked]>, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <[email-masked]>
Subject: Francesca Palombini's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-09: (with COMMENT)
Francesca Palombini has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-09: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the work on this document.

I strongly support John's DISCUSS and COMMENT points, especially:

* overuse of abbreviations and the assumptions that the reader is familiar with
all concepts and terms used make the document really hard to read for
non-expert in the field. I'll also point out that having a terminology section
with expansion but with no references is not as useful as one with proper
descriptions and references.

* there are several occurrences of SHOULD in the document that left me
wondering in which cases it is acceptable to not go with the recommended
behavior. Again, John has pointed out 2 of them I believe, but I would suggest
to check all normative SHOULD as only a couple were put in context. Also note
that even if the context might be obvious to the authors and wg, it would help
the reader with one more sentence clarifying it.

Francesca