comparison draft-ietf-sidrops-avoid...txt @ 18:d8dde47d0a7f

as submitted?
author Henry Thompson <ht@markup.co.uk>
date Mon, 19 Oct 2026 13:42:27 +0100
parents 4ca654e435db
children
comparison
equal deleted inserted replaced
17:4ca654e435db 18:d8dde47d0a7f
1 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidrops-avoid-rpki-state-in-bgp/reviewrequest/24139/login/ 1 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidrops-avoid-rpki-state-in-bgp/reviewrequest/24139/login/
2 Document: draft-ietf-sidrops-avoid-rpki-state-in-bgp-11
3 Title: Guidance to Avoid Carrying RPKI Validation States in BGP Path Attributes
4 Reviewer: Henry S. Thompson
5 Review Date: 2025-06-17
6
7 *Summary*
8
9 As far as I can tell as a non-specialist, the presentation of this
10 proposed BCP is in good shape. There is one minor suggestion and some
11 editorial nits below.
12
13 *Minor point*
14
15 1.
16
17 ... "states leak through to EGBP speakers." Would it be possible to
18 _briefly_ mention here at least one known way in which such leakage
19 can occur in a conformant router? That way operators of 'good'
20 routers may realise this document is relevant to them.
21
22 *Nits*
23
24 1.
25
26 In this phrase
27
28 "Annotating ... Attribute carried across EBGP session (based on validation
29 states) means that BGP UPDATE messages have to be sent to every
30 neighbor when the aforementioned validation states"
31
32 there's a minor grammatical problem. I would suggest the following
33 change
34
35 "... Attribute carried across an EBGP session (based on validation
36 states) means that BGP UPDATE messages have to be sent to every
37 neighbor when the aforementioned validation states"
38
39 4.
40
41 "BGP communities" -> "BGP Communities" [here and in 4 other places below]
42
43 "hold similar" -> "hold in a similar way"
44
45 4.1
46
47 "a large amounts" -> "large amounts"
48
49 4.1.2
50
51 "caused by operators to signal validation states" ->
52 "caused by operators signalling validation states"
53
54