Subject: [Detnet] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-19: (with COMMENT)

From: Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 22:20:01 -0700

Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases-19: No Objection

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-detnet-use-cases/

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

There's a lot of interesting and useful information in this document.  Thanks
to all who put work into getting it done!

It is not hard to tell that sections were written by different authors -- in
itself, that is a good thing because it highlights the diversity of the
scenarios considered and the applicability of the DetNet technology.  However,
the result is an uneven treatment of the different use cases, from how they are
described (some include more details and others get a higher level
description), to even the number of references used.

This last point is what I would like to call out as a point of improvement:
basically starting in Section 7, none of the use cases have a single reference
in them...even when explicitly pointing at a resource, for example: "see the
IETF99 Network Slicing BOF session agenda and materials" (§10.6).  It would
increase the value of the document if relevant references were added.