Subject: [mpls] [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-multi-topology-09.txt

From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 05:30:48 -0400

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-multi-topology-09.txt
     LDP Extensions for Multi Topology Routing
Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
Review Date: 18-October-2013
IETF LC End Date: 6-November-2013
IESG Telechat date: N/A

Summary: This document is nearly ready for publication as a Proposed 
Standard RFC.  I believe there is one major issue that is easily addressed.

Major issues:
     I may have simply missed this reviewing the document, but as far as 
I can tell there is no specification of the relationship between the 
MT-IDs in this document and the MT-IDs used elsewhere.  Yes, I can take 
a guess at the intent.  But is it stated somewhere that these are the 
same IDs negotiated in the relevant IGP?  Or is there some other intent?

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
     I find it odd that the MT-ID follows the IP prefix in the various 
formats.  Yes, the computer can parse both.  But since we tend to think 
in Network byte order, I expect more significant information (MT-ID) to 
occur before less significant information (IP prefix within topology.)