Reviewer: Dhruv Dhody Review result: Has Issues Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/rtg/RtgDir Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-ietf-lsvr-applicability-15 Reviewer: Dhruv Dhody Review Date: 2025-01-04 IETF LC End Date: 2024-12-25 Intended Status: Informational ## Summary: This document discusses the usage and applicability of BGP Shortest Path First (BGP-SPF) extensions in the DC networks utilizing Clos or Fat-Tree topologies. This is an informational document intended to provide a simplified guide for the deployment of BGP-SPF extensions in DC. ## Comments: The document is well-written and easy to read, but I have some minor comments and nits. ## Minor Issues: - Consider including "BGP" in the title of the document. - Consider rephrasing section 1; the use of "after" to start the 2nd and 3rd paragraph does not sound right. - Figure 1, I dont understand the reason for labeling the servers as A,O,B,O,Z,O,O,O? Further, it might also be worth to explain the topology in words clearly marking which nodes belong to which tier as the figure could be confusing (for example, is Node 3 Tier-1 or 3 could be unclear from just the figure). - Section 4, there is also a longer motivation section (1.2) in draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf. Should it be referenced here? - Section 5.1; "The reasons for enabling both SAFIs at the same time is out of the scope of this document." -- is there a reference where the reason is listed? Perhaps draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf? This seems like important information to provide to the reader. - Provide either a small description or a reference for "bi-connected graph" - Consider rephrasing section 5.2.2, it is unclear if this just one possible heuristic or it is THE mechanism being specified that all implementations should follow. - In Figure 2, should there be a link (~) between Leaf 1 and Leaf 2? ## Nits: - Expand OAM, LLDP, BFD, IBGP on first use. - Section 4; s/prohibits a deployment of/prohibits the deployment of/ - Section 5; s/used by [RFC2328]/used by OSPF [RFC2328]/ - Section 5.4; s/accomplished today with using/accomplished today by using/ - Section 5.4; s/could have parameters than/could have more parameters than/ - Section 8; s/filtered and the abstracted/filtered and abstracted/ - Section 8; s/if tradition BGP routing/if traditional BGP routing/ - Various instances of articles (a, an, the) missing. Thanks! Dhruv -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
