Hello,
I was asked to do a RTG review on the pimp-light-draft, this review is based on revision 06 of the draft.

General comment:

Multicast in general can be quite complex to get right, so having simplified protocol options (like this draft) for some situations is a good idea. Content of this draft reads good, its just the graphics (and their explanation) could use a bit more polish.

Section 3.2.2:

I think the graphics in 3.2.2 is a little bit too compact with too many things going on. I assume that the domains are meant to be vertical "slices" and the PIM Domains are the groups A-B-E and the group D-E-F, the BIER domain would contain B-C-D-E-F? I think this part needs a bit more text that just states which group is meant by each "annotation". Its difficult to see which "line" in this graphics is a connection between nodes and which is meant to mark the domain areas. Maybe it would help to explicitly state the domain membership when the domain are first mentioned in this section?

Section 3.4:

I think the description of the graphics here in the text is better than in 3.2.2, but this graphics also feels a bit "cramped". Maybe UBER and DBER could be just described in the text instead of putting it into the graphics?

Something like
"In another example, if PLI is configured automatically, as an example in BIER case, when the downstream BIER Edge Router (DBER) node D is no longer reachable, the upstream BIER Edge Router (UBER) node B..."


Henning Rogge