I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-https. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more details on the INT Directorate, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/>.

This document specifies the "SVCB" and "HTTPS" DNS resource record (RR) types to facilitate the lookup of information needed to make connections to network services, such as for HTTP origins.

This document is clear and comprehensive. Specifically, rev -08 improved structure, terminology, and readability. It seems ready modulo some nits.

Editorial suggestions:
* s/followup/follow-up/g
* "   *  Fallback to the the client's non-Alt-Svc connection behavior" --> duplicate "the"
* "IANA from the "Resource Record (RR) TYPEs" subregistry" --> looks like that's a registry, not sub-registry (same with other parts of the IANA sections)
* s/e.g./e.g.,/g
* "2 octet field" -> "2-octet field"

Editorially, I find this construct a bit interesting -- indirections, and wonder if a bit more context can be added to S7.5.
7.5.  "mandatory"
   See Section 8.
8.  ServiceMode RR compatibility and mandatory keys

Thank you for your consideration,

Carlos.