Draft: draft-ietf-bmwg-conterm-05
Reviewer: Lucy Lynch
Date: March 30, 2004


This draft is ready for publication as an [?] RFC
(w/ a few small nits)

? informational rather than standards track?

This document is clear and well written. The first half (through 4),
draws on existing documents and current practice for definitions, the
second half is a bit more speculative and draws on open research
questions.

notes:

Comments from the working group on draft-ietf-bmwg-conterm-04.txt

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/bmwg/current/msg00478.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/bmwg/current/msg00480.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/bmwg/current/msg00482.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/bmwg/current/msg00483.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/bmwg/current/msg00485.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/bmwg/current/msg00484.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/bmwg/current/msg00487.html

All of the issues raised have been addressed in 05.

NOTE: no 2119 keywords in doc/no ref

   Status
   - expire date has already passed

   Copyright Notice
   - ^2003^2004

   Abstract
   -OK

   TOC
   -OK

   1.    Introduction

   "It is the first part of a two document series, of which the subsequent
   document will contain the associated tests and methodology."

   - ? when two documents are closely tied, does the second RFC #
     get plugged by the RFC editor after the documents advance?

    "We note that for testing purposes all optional parameters should be
     turned off. All variable parameters should be in their default
     setting unless specified by the test."

   -  are these really SHOULDs ???

   "Cevice Under Test (DUT)"

   - ^Cevice^Device

   3.6   BGP Device
   - tiny nit "never forwards traffic" ^forwards^forward (plural devices)

   3.9   BGP Peer
   "we recommend"
   - is this a "RECOMMENED" ?

   3.11  MinRouteAdvertisementInterval (MRAI)
   - does the historical 1771 recommendation on jitter predate 2119
keywords?

   4.    Constituent Elements of a Router or Network of Routers
   4.1   Default Route, Default Free Table, and Full Table
   "default-free table(DFT)"
   - style question should this be "Default-Free Table(DFT)" to be
     consistant w/ DUT ref , 1.?

   5.    Characterization of Sets of Update Messages

   - there is a shift in language from historical definitions and
   current commen practice to more speculative "researchy" language
   (Update Trains). Not a problem, just note that the ground here is
   more likely to shift over time.

   5.5   Route Flap
   "A route flap ia a change of state (withdrawal, announcement,
   attribute change) for a route."
   - ? does a single change in state constitute a flap?

   "A bench-marker  should use a mixture of different route change
   events in testing."
   - is this a "SHOULD"?

   8.2.2 Timers
   "As part of a test report, all relevant timers should be reported
   if they use non-default value.
   - "SHOULD"?

   8.2.3 TCP Parameters Underlying BGP Transport
   "all relevant parameters characterizing the TCP sessions should be
   provided"
   - is this a "SHOULD"?

   8.2.4 Authentication

   9.    Security Considerations
   - OK
   10.   Acknowledgments
         -OK
         Normative References
         -OK
         Informative References
         -OK
         For Internet Draft consistency purposes only
         - ? is this common usage?
         Authors' Addresses
         -OK
         Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements
         -OK