Hello

I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of this draft.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13/

The routing directorate will, on request from the working group chair,
perform an “early” review of a draft before it is submitted for
publication to the IESG. The early review can be performed at any time
during the draft’s lifetime as a working group document.

For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/rtg/RtgDir

Document: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13-02
Reviewer: Tal Mizrahi
Review Date: Nov 13, 2023
Intended Status: Standards Track

Summary:
I have some concerns about this document that I think should be
resolved before it is submitted to the IESG.

Comments:
The draft is clear and straightforward. There is one main comment that
needs to be addressed.

Major comment:
The "Security Considerations" section needs to describe the security
considerations that are specific to the current document. For example,
the second note of Section 3, and perhaps some more text that explains
why this is important. The existing text in this section is not
helpful to the reader. The section cites 9 references with a brief
description of each reference, but without the description of the
security considerations of each reference. The last paragraph of the
section - is it relevant to the current document? It would be best to
stick with security considerations that are strictly relevant to the
current document, and not to PCE in general.

Nits:
- "if a PCEPS supports more than one version" - the sentence is not
clear. Perhaps "if a PCEPS implementation supports more than one
version"?
- Section 4 - second paragraph - there is a missing period at the end
of the paragraph.