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-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07.txt
Reviewer: Les Ginsberg
Review Date: 11 January 2018
IETF LC End Date: Unknown
Intended Status: Experimental

Summary:
    This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be considered prior to publication.

Comments:

This draft is very well written. Ideas are presented in a logical and coherent manner and I find it easy to understand the concepts even
without necessarily being an expert in the specific technology.

Major Issues:

No major issues found.

Minor Issues:

No minor issues found.

Nits:

The first use of LCAF (Section 2) should be expanded.

I find the acronym "RTR" a bit unfortunate for the obvious reason that it intuitively represents "just a router". I wonder if the authors could
consider something like "ReTR". I am sensitive to the fact that this document has been around since 2014 and has undergone significant WG review. I have
not attempted to track all of the email history regarding this document. Perhaps this point has been considered and consensus has been that the
RTR acronym is the best choice. If so, feel free to disregard my suggestion, but as someone who read this document for the first time I found myself 
looking back for the definition of "RTR" multiple times as I read through the text.

   Les