Subject: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-rpd-14

From: Himanshu Shah via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 14:47:56 -0800

Reviewer: Himanshu Shah
Review result: Ready

The document is written well.

I am glad it covers the the precedence of static routing policy  against the
signaled routing policy. It would be good if the example would use the explicit
address range to explain; (for example - 1.1.1.0 to 1.1.1.255),  in section
4.2.1.

I was asked to review version 14 and have not checked the delta between the
latest version 15.

---

From: Huaimo Chen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 00:32:57 +0000

Hi Himanshu,

    Thank you very much for your review and valuable comments.
    My response is inline below with [HC].

Best Regards,
Huaimo
________________________________
From: Himanshu Shah via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 5:47 PM
To: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>; [email-masked] <[email-masked]>
Subject: Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-rpd-14

Reviewer: Himanshu Shah
Review result: Ready

I am glad it covers the the precedence of static routing policy  against the
signaled routing policy. It would be good if the example would use the explicit
address range to explain; (for example - 1.1.1.0 to 1.1.1.255),  in section
4.2.1.
[HC]: We will use explicit address range in the example accordingly.