Hi there

I have conducted an Early Review of this document on behalf of the routing directorate. In my opinion, this document is ready to progress subject to resolution of a few nits. Please attend to these along with the next published version of the draft.

My only note of caution below is to use the process for early IANA code point allocation if specific code point values are required.

Best regards
Jon


Section 3.
Clarify this passage:
OLD
Root is an IP address identifying the Root of a P2MP tree. This can be either an IPv4 or IPv6 address and can be inferred from the PTA length.
NEW
Root is an IP address identifying the Root of a P2MP tree. This can be either an IPv4 or IPv6 address. The address type can be inferred from the PTA length.
END

Section 5
Typos:
OLD
Egress PEs join asLeaf Nodes using Intrra-AS I-PMSI or Leaf Auto-Discovery routes.
NEW
Egress PEs join as Leaf Nodes using Intra-AS I-PMSI or Leaf Auto-Discovery routes.
END

Section 5.2
Typos:
OLD
To join a SRv6 Ingres Replication P-Tunnel advertised in PTA of Inra-AS, Inter-AS, or Selective S-PMSI A-D routes…
NEW
To join a SRv6 Ingress Replication P-Tunnel advertised in PTA of Intra-AS, Inter-AS, or Selective S-PMSI A-D routes…
END

Section 6
Remove redundant RECOMMENDED/SHOULD clauses.
OLD
Since Leaf A-D routes are used to discover Leaf PE of a P2MP tree, it is RECOMMENDED that PEs SHOULD damp Leaf A-D routes…
NEW
Since Leaf A-D routes are used to discover Leaf PE of a P2MP tree, PEs SHOULD damp Leaf A-D routes…
END

Section 8

Please avoid specifying code point values before IANA has allocated them. If it's important that certain code points are used (for example, because of fielded implementations) then please consider following the process to secure an early allocation of these code points from IANA prior to publication as an RFC.  See https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7120.