This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
discussion list for information.

When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC
tsv-art@ietf.org if you reply to or forward this review.

Nits:

Section 2:
It looks strange to have text followed by a subsection containing a single
sentence.

Section 2.1:
Missing . at the end.

Section 3:
OLD:
In section 4.5 it describes that If a router
NEW:
In section 4.5 it describes that if a router

Section 3.2
Missing . at the end of first sentence.

Section 3.5
Missing . at the end of the second paragraph.

References
All are strangely formatted. Only the title should be enclosed in ",
there should be a link to the RFC, ...

References
OLD:
ambiguity of
NEW:
Ambiguity of
OLD:
Tuxen
NEW
Tüxen