I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional-09
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2024-10-01
IETF LC End Date: 2024-10-03
IESG Telechat date: ?

Summary:

This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should 
be fixed before publication.

(Arguably the first nit is a minor issue. I decided it didn't warrant 
raising the severity of the review to "has issues".)

NITS: 4

1) NIT/MINOR ISSUE: Clarity of logic

In sections 3.*, the message handling rules have complex nested logic 
regarding the handling of the P, I, and R flags across multiple 
messages. As written these have the potential to be misunderstood. I 
suggest it could be helpful to provide some diagrams to summarize this 
logic. For instance, state diagrams or tables.

2) NIT: Ignoring things

Section 3.3.3 says: "The I flag has no meaning in the PCinitiate message 
[RFC8281] and is ignored."

Ignoring things often proves to turn out badly. Also, this statement is 
non-normative. I suggest you at least say senders MUST clear this flag, 
while receivers SHOULD/MUST ignore it.

3) NIT: Language usage

There are minor issues of language usage throughout the document.
For instance: use of "is" vs. "are", and singular vs. plural nouns. I 
started to enumerate these but decided that a long list of these would 
not be helpful. These don't impact readability, and I trust they will 
eventually be corrected by the editor.

4) NIT: Typo

In section 3.1:

s/To safely use this future/To safely use this feature/