Subject: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir telechat review of draft-ietf-taps-minset-10

From: Ben Niven-Jenkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 10:47:24 -0700

Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins
Review result: Has Issues

 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-taps-minset-10.txt
Reviewer: Ben Niven-Jenkins
Review Date: 19 September 2018
Intended Status: Informational

Summary: I have some minor concerns about this document that I think should be
resolved before publication.

Comments:

The document contains lots of interesting information that is well articulated
and very readable, however it is not clear who the intended audience for the
document is and what that audience is expected to do with the information in
the document.

Major Issues: No major issues found.

Minor Issues:

It is not clear to me what the purpose of the document is, who the document is
aimed at and what the document's relationship is to other TAPS document.

For example, if I am an implementer of a transport system, should I read this
document because it will aid my implementation, or should I read it if I am
interested in why I am expected to implement certain things, etc?

I think an additional paragraph should be added to the introduction to clarify
the above along the lines of "This document describes ..." and/or "This
document is intended to be read by ..."

Ben