search

ietf-wg-idr / draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct

1 stars 2 forks source link

NITs in draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-33 #72

Open suehares opened 7 months ago

suehares commented 7 months ago

NITS - versions 30-33

NITS-01

-33-status: Ignore as it is a tools artifact

NITs-01 in -30 One line is too long: ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 3 characters in excess of 72.

The NIT checker seems to have problems with "xxx" in line length.

NITs-01 in -33 ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 3 characters in excess of 72.

The NIT checker seems to have problems with "xxx" in line length.

NITs-02

Status: Ignore as it is a tools artifact -33-NITs-02
-- The document has examples using IPv4 documentation addresses according to RFC6890, but does not use any IPv6 documentation addresses. Maybe there should be IPv6 examples, too?

NITs-03 - RFC2199 boilerplante

-33-status: Ignore, tool artifact.

-31 NITs

Status: ignore, tool artifact.

draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-31.txt: -(2536): Line appears to be too long, but this could be caused by non-ascii characters in UTF-8 encoding

2536 IANA is requested to add the following subregistry under the “Border 2537 Gateway Protocol (BGP) Extended Communities”:

-(2560): Line appears to be too long, but this could be caused by non-ascii characters in UTF-8 encoding 2560 IANA is requested to add the following subregistry under the “Border 2561 Gateway Protocol (BGP) Extended Communities”:

-- The document has examples using IPv4 documentation addresses according to RFC6890, but does not use any IPv6 documentation addresses. Maybe there should be IPv6 examples, too?

suehares commented 7 months ago

Issues is to track the problem with line length.

This is left open for the AD review.

suehares commented 7 months ago

-32 NIT Issues

33-status: Resolved, closed

== Unused Reference: 'RFC6811' is defined on line 2757, but no explicit reference was found in the text

== Unused Reference: 'RFC9256' is defined on line 2889, but no explicit reference was found in the text

Shepherd's view:

  1. RFC6811 - is indirectly mentioned in the Security considerations.
    [RFC6811 - BGP Prefix Origin Validation] - Discuss with AD if should be mentioned.

  2. RFC9256 - is the Segment Routing Policy Architecture It seemed reasonable to list it as one of the references.
    Discuss with AD if it should be mentioned in a specific way.

  3. draft-ietf-pce-pcep-color-02 This change will be picked up with the next revision.