Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins Review result: Has Nits Hello
I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of this draft. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-bgp-multicast/ The routing directorate will, on request from the working group chair, perform an “early” review of a draft before it is submitted for publication to the IESG. The early review can be performed at any time during the draft’s lifetime as a working group document. The purpose of the early review depends on the stage that the document has reached. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/rtg/RtgDir Document: draft-ietf-bess-bgp-multicast-05.txt Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins Review Date: 10 November 2023 Intended Status: Standards Track Summary: This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be considered prior to being submitted to the IESG. Comments: The document is well written and easy to read and understand. Nits: Section 1.2.4 - “For unlabeled (x,g) unidirectional trees, the upstream peer MAY prefer LAN interfaces to send traffic, since multiple downstream peers may be reached simultaneously, or it may make a decision based on local policy, e.g., for load balancing purpose.” I do not understand why the first MAY is capitalised. Is this a mistake and it should be in lowercase like the other instances of may in that sentence? Section 1.2.5 - “PIM and BGP MUST not be used simultaneously between two neighbors for multicast purpose, and routers connected to the same LAN MUST be transitioned during the same maintenance window.” I think the “MUST not” should be “MUST NOT”? Thanks Ben _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
