I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-lamps-5g-nftypes. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more details on the INT Directorate, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/.

Based on my review, if I was on the IESG I would ballot this document as NO OBJECTION. This document seems fairly straightforward.

The following are minor issues (typos, misspelling, minor text improvements) with the document:

- general:

Review capitalization of NF Type(s) vs NF type(s) and also NFType vs NF Type?

- Section 1:

In: “There are 49 NF Types defined in for 3GPP Release 17; they are listed in Table 6.1.6.3.3-1 of [TS29.510], and each NF type is identified by a short ASCII string.”, the “in for” is odd, perhaps remove in?

- Section 5:

In: “Different levels of confidence that the NFTypes are proper assigned might be needed to contribute to the overall security of the 5G system.”, I think “were properly” might be better?

- Bernie Volz (for Int Directorate)