Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-04

[Juliusz Chroboczek]

Thanks for your review, Roni.

> The document was changed in 02 from experimental to standard track. There is
> text in the end of section 4 about the algorithm being experimental

Right.

> from the mailing list i noticed that the reason to make it standard
> track is to allow using the TLVs by other WGs.

My understanding is that the goal is to allow other WGs to depend on the
protocol without incurring the complications of a downref.

Here's some background.  On the one hand, the algorithm has been
extensively tested in simulation, and deployed in production on hundreds of
routers, with no ill effects.  On the other hand, we don't fully understand
why it works -- in fact, I'm surprised it works as well as it does, I'd
expect at least some instability.

Hence, we're quite confident that this protocol is both useful and safe to
deploy on the Internet, which makes it a candidate for a Standards Track
document.  At the same time, we don't want to preclude experimentation
with other algorithms, possibly easier to analyse from a theoretical
standpoint, and hence we prefer to stress that the algorithm is experimental.

> Of course you could split the document to two documents one standard
> track and the other experimental but as i said this is up to the group
> and i have no real objection to publish the document as is.

I'd rather not split the document, since the first part would lack
rationale if we did.  If there are strong objections, we could conceivably
move the algorithm into an appendix, but I'd rather not do that, as I feel
that the document reads well as it stands.

Thanks again,

-- Juliusz

___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

[Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-04

[Roni Even via Datatracker]

Reviewer: Roni Even
Review result: Ready with Nits

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

.

Document: draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-??
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review Date: 2023-10-02
IETF LC End Date: 2023-10-11
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary:
The document is ready for publication as a standard track rfc but i have a
question that i defined as a nit

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
The document was changed in 02 from experimental to standard track. There is
text in the end of section 4 about the algorithm being experimental and from
the mailing list i noticed that the reason to make it standard track is to
allow using the TLVs by other WGs.  As an external observer i have no problem
and noticed that the wg chairs approved it and made a comment that it is open
to discussion on the mailing list. Personally i did not see much discussion so
i am curious if this type of document with an experimental section is OK. Of
course you could split the document to two documents one standard track and the
other experimental but as i said this is up to the group and i have no real
objection to publish the document as is.


___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art