Subject: [mpls] Ben Campbell's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-app-aware-tldp-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:19:38 -0700

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mpls-app-aware-tldp-08: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-app-aware-tldp/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This should be easy to fix, but needs to be fixed before the draft progresses:

Section 7 establishes a new IANA registry under the Label Distribution Protocol
(LDP) Parameters page. Unless I missed something (which happens) it doesn't
specify the registration policy as required by BCP26. Please see RFC 5226
section 4.1 for details.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

-General:  When you use the word "application", is a person skilled in MPLS
automatically going to think in terms of the sort of "applications" listed
here? If not, it would be good to have a paragraph early in the introduction
that describes what you mean by "applications". As an application-layer person,
I tend to think of it in terms of application-layer applications. Am I correct
to assume that it would not make sense to register, for example, HTTP in the
the LDP Targeted Application Identifier registry?

- 1.1: I noticed a number instances of at least "may" in lower case. If your
intent is that lower case words not be treated as keywords, please consider
using the new boilerplate from RFC 8174

Nits:

-1, first paragraph: "LDP uses extended discovery mechanism..."
Missing article before "discovery".

-2.2, paragraph 4 and 5, "... a maximum value, as 0xffff.": should "as" be
"such as"?

-2.2, paragraphs 6 and 7: the "it" in the opening sentence of each paragraph
has an unclear antecedent.