Subject: Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-rfc3107bis-02

From: Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 13:29:57 -0700

Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review result: Ready

Firstly my apologies for the lateness of this review.

This is a very well written draft, and can proceed as is.

Useful clarity might be added to Section 4 (dataplane) by the inclusion of some
figures. I say this as someone that finds it easier to take in information in
that format, so that is a personal preference comment, the text is correct and
technically sufficient.

There is an intriguing piece of text in the dataplane section "While this may
be useful in certain scenarios, it may provide unintended results in other
scenarios." which I think might be usefully expanded to give at least one
example of a use, and an unintended consequence.

In the introduction it says: "In [RFC3107], this feature was controlled by a
BGP Capability Code that has never been implemented, and is now essentially
obsolete." which left me wondering whether there was the intention to formally
deprecate the feature through the RFC system.

---

From: Eric C Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 08:52:31 -0400

> deprecate the feature through the RFC system.

The IANA consideration section of this document requests that the 
"multiple routes to a destination" capability code be marked as 
deprecated, with a reference to this document.  Isn't that sufficient?

---

From: Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 14:24:59 +0100

> deprecated, with a reference to this document.  Isn't that sufficient?

Hi Eric,

Sorry I missed that.

I am not sure if the same protocol applies to IANA codepoints as RFCs, 
but if you were obsoleting an RFC it would need to be noted in the 
abstract and the introduction.

If you do a respin it might be better to note the deprecation near the 
text on obsolescence, since people tend to read the main text and not 
the IANA section. However at the end of the day it is up to the AD how 
they want to handle this.

- Stewart