Subject: [Pce] AD review of draft-ietf-pce-gmpls-aps-req

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 22:50:10 +0100

Hi,

I have conducted my usual AD review intended to catch any issues before
IETF last call and IESG evaluation.

With this document my comments are relatively minor and so I would like
you to consider them as part of the IETF last call which I will start 
shortly.

Thanks for the work.

Adrian

---

idnits shows a couple of issues with your references

  == Unused Reference: 'RFC3945' is defined on line 373, but no explicit
     reference was found in the text

  == Unused Reference: 'RFC4927' is defined on line 402, but no explicit
     reference was found in the text

These both seem like relevant references and I suggest that you find a 
place in the text to point to them.

---

Some work on acronyms, please.

PCE needs to be expanded on first use in the Abstract and the main text
(not on the second use :-)

OTOH, MPLS and GMPLS do not need to be expanded.

PCC shows up in section 2.1
PCReq and PCRep are in 2.1 (but expanded a little later)
P2MP is in section 2.2
ERO and XRO show in section 3.1
PCEP shows in section 3.2

---

Section 1 para 4 seems to say that SRLG is covered in RFC 3473. Are you
sure? Or do you need a different reference?

---

In Section 3.1 reqs (1), (2) and (3) you appear to be limiting the
supported values to only those listed or those in the referenced RFCs.

You may do better to say less. Just point at the base definition of the
signaling fields (in RFC 3473?) and then say "all current and future 
values".

---

Section 6

Julien Meuric not Meulic