Reviewer: Russ Housley Review result: Almost Ready 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://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>. Document: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-sr-segtypes-ext-05 Reviewer: Russ Housley Review Date: 2024-10-25 IETF LC End Date: 2024-11-11 IESG Telechat date: Unknown Summary: Almost Ready Major Concerns: Section 2.10: The text says: The Segment Types sub-TLVs described above may contain the following flags in the "Segment Flags" field defined in ... In Table 8 of [I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi], these are called "SR Policy Segment Flags". In the nine previous sections, the field is just labeled "Flags". Please add some words to clarify. Section 4: I suggest a rewrite: The security considerations in [I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi] apply to the new segment types defined in this document. No additional security considerations are introduced in this document. Section 5: Please consider something similar to the proposed rewrite for Section 4. Minor Concerns: Section 2.8 and Section 2.9: The SRv6 SID and the SRv6 Endpoint Behavior and SID Structure are both optional. I do not see how a receiver could determine when the SRv6 SID is absent and the SRv6 Endpoint Behavior and SID Structure is present. I suspect that this is not allowed, but the text does not make this clear. Please clarify. Nits: Abstract and Introduction: Please spell out "BGP SR Policy SAFI" on the first occurrence. Section 2.3: s/present else/present, else/ Section 2.4: s/present else/present, else/ Section 2.5: s/present else/present, else/ Section 2.6: s/present else/present, else/ -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
