Hello,

I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft.
The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related
drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes
on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to
the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please
see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir

Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it
would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last
Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through
discussion or by updating the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-raw-use-cases-05
Reviewer: Victoria Pritchard
Review Date: 01/09/2022
Intended Status: Informational

Summary:

    This document is basically ready for publication but has nits that
should be considered prior to publication.

Comments:

    This is an interesting and informative draft, clearly identifying use
cases and the reliability, availability and latency characteristics which
are important to them.

Major Issues:

    No major issues found.

Minor Issues:

    No minor issues found.

Nits:

Introduction
- "by leveraging on lower (L2 and below) capabilities" -> "by leveraging
lower layer (Layer 2 and below) capabilities"?
- " (RAW) is an effort to provide Deterministic
   Networking Mechanisms on across a multi-hop path that includes a" - dont
need both 'on' and 'across'

No terminology / acronyms / abbreviations section - most are actually
expanded inside the draft or are very well known but a few I did not
understand, e.g.:
- APT/TMA TMA/ENR ENR/ORP in figure 1
- FRE in section 6.4

Figure 1
- transceiver appears twice at the bottom left - is one instance meant to
be for LDACS GS on the right hand side of the figure?

2
- "while during
   en-route" --> "during flight" / "while en-route" - don't need both.
2.5.1
- "what it is important is to keep " - "what is important is to keep"

3.1, 4.1, 5.1, etc. the sub-heading title
- capital letters needed for "use-case". Should section 2.1 also be
"Use-Case Description"?

4.4
- teh -> the

5.1
- Blue-Ray -> Blu-ray

6.4
-  "Note thought," -> "Note though,"
- "Dual/multiple link" - the sentence after this is hard to read, does it
mean "due to the competitions, interference is common"? Or "due to the fact
that competitions and interference are common"?

7.1 "other time of vehicles" -> "other types of vehicles"?

8.1 "the use of multiples robots" -> "the use of multiple robots"

10 - "Future revisions of this document will include
   specific text devoted to highlight this non-latency critical
   requirements."
This seems to have already been added as a sub-section for all use cases.