Subject: [Idr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-07

From: Theresa Enghardt via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2020 13:28:16 -0700

Reviewer: Theresa Enghardt
Review result: Ready with Nits

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-idr-capabilities-registry-change-??
Reviewer: Theresa Enghardt
Review Date: 2020-04-26
IETF LC End Date: 2020-04-30
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: The documents is short and to the point. While its purpose is already
very clear, I noticed two minor points that could further add to document
clarity.

Major issues: None.

Minor issues:

To make this document more self-contained, it would be nice to include one or
two sentences to the introduction that briefly explain what BGP Capabilities
are.

Regarding the code points that are now assigned as "First Come First Serve" in
Section 3, the document points to drafts for some of them, but not for all. Is
there any documentation for the code points that are currently without any
reference? If so, please provide a reference. If not, maybe it's worth briefly
stating that for some of them there is no reference and that they are all
deprecated, e.g., because they were used in past experiments. For code point
129, a reference to a draft is provided in the "Description" column, while for
code point 185, a reference to a draft is provided in the "Reference / Change
Controller" column. Is this intentional? If not, please consider unifying the
presentation here. Otherwise, please consider making clear why the references
are in different columns.

Nits/editorial comments: None.

---

From: Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 03:54:58 -0700

On April 26, 2020 at 4:28:18 PM, Theresa Enghardt wrote:

Theresa:  Hi!  Thanks you for the review!

John:  Please make the changes below before the document is discussed
by the IESG.

Thanks!!

Alvaro.

...
> Regarding the code points that are now assigned as "First Come First Serve"
> in Section 3, the document points to drafts for some of them, but not for
> all. Is there any documentation for the code points that are currently
> without any reference? If so, please provide a reference. If not, maybe it's
> worth briefly stating that for some of them there is no reference and that
> they are all deprecated, e.g., because they were used in past experiments.

Yes -- for consistency they should either all include a reference
(which is available) or not.  Because of their nature, I would rather
if all just pointed to "(this document)" to avoid confusion with
continued work.

BTW, we should also be consistent in the "prestandard" tagging: add
the tag to the 185 entry.

> For code point 129, a reference to a draft is provided in the "Description"
> column, while for code point 185, a reference to a draft is provided in the
> "Reference / Change Controller" column. Is this intentional? If not, please
> consider unifying the presentation here. Otherwise, please consider making
> clear why the references are in different columns.

s/draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd/Routing Policy Distribution

---

From: John Scudder <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 22:00:58 +0000

Hi Alvaro,

I’ve just uploaded -08 with your requested changes, also with the extra explanatory introduction text Theresa suggested (thanks!).

—John

> On Apr 30, 2020, at 6:54 AM, Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
> 
>