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-idr-rfd-usable-02
Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
Review Date: Sep-6-2013
IETF LC End Date: Unknown
IESG Telechat date: Unknown

This draft is basically ready for publication, but has one minor issue
that should be fixed (or at least looked at) before publication.

Major: 0
Minor: 1
Nits: 0

Minor issue:

- This is a document on the standards track.  Therefore, it is rather
 disconcerting to see the following statement in the draft (end of
 Section 2): "[This document] is not a panacea, nor is it a deep and
 thorough approach to flap reduction."

 I understand the panacea part, it is the trailing phrase that I want
 to draw attention to.

 Now, I am not a routing expert so I would presume that despite the
 exhortations above, the chairs of the WG and the AD have looked at
 the document and are comfortable with the sentence I have pointed out.
 (Sorry if it has been discussed in the WG.)  Assuming that is the
 case, I am happy to proceed with this document.  Assuming it is not,
 would an Experimental designation be appropriate?

Thanks,

- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg at {bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurbani at alcatel-lucent.com
Web: 

http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/

  | Calendar: 

http://goo.gl/x3Ogq