Reviewer: Elwyn Davies 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-dots-use-cases-23 Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review Date: 2020-06-10 IETF LC End Date: 2020-06-11 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: Ready wih some minor nits. Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: s1, para 1: Just a thought: might be worth adding to the end of this para: "and increase the time for deployment in a situation where speed is often of the essence". s1, last para: Suggest adding in reference to DOTS requirements doc which is referred to in s2: OLD: This document provides sample use cases that provided input for the design of the DOTS protocols [RFC8782][RFC8783]. NEW This document provides sample use cases that motivated the requirements for the DOTS protocols [RFC8612] and provided input for the design of those protocols [RFC8782][RFC8783]. ENDS s2: For more logical ordering, move the definition of DDos Mitigation Service Provider after definition of DDoS Mitigation Service. s2, DDoS Mitigation Service: OLD: Service subscriptions usually involve Service Level Agreement (SLA) that have to be met. NEW: Each service subscription usually involves a Service Level Agreement (SLA) that has to be met. ENDS s3.1, para 1: The abbreviation ITP has already been defined so you shouldn't have a redefinition here. s3.1, para 7: s/thought different/though different/ s3.1, 2nd set of bullets, that are below Fig 1: This woud be more elegant using (a), (b), etc as the bullet labels. s3.1: Comment (not being familiar with the DOTS proposals): The text indicates that the ITP mitigation effort is an all or nothing buisness. Is this always the case or could the client request or the server provide a proportional response rather than an all or nothing response? s3.2, last sentence of 2nd para after Fig 2: s/These exact/The exact/ s3.3, para 2: s/various information/various sets of information/ s3.3, para after Figure 4: s/monitor various network traffic/monitor various aspects of the network traffic/. s3.3, 2nd para after Figure 4: s/it's/it is/ s3.3, last five paras: Calling out a web interface specifically is overly specific. Suggest adding 'for example'in at least one case or changing it to 'user interface'. s3.3, first para on page 11: OLD: to infer the DDoS Mitigation to elaborate and coordinate. NEW: to infer, elaborate and coordinate the appropriate DDoS Mitigation. ENDS s3.3, 3rd and subsequent paras on page 11: The orchestrator appears to change from one DOTS server to a plurality at this point. Please make it clear whether there is one or many. If only one, then s/The orchestrator DOTS servers returns this information back/The orchestrator DOTS server returns this information/ and s/servers/server/ subsequently. s3.3, last para s/like requesting/such as requesting/ s7: This is an informational document and, as such, cannot have normative references. Please combine all references into one refererences section. -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
