I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer
for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-isis-rfc2966bis-03.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2008-06-16
IETF LC End Date: 2008-06-23
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary: Ready, minor questions

Comments: This does exactly what its abstract promises.

I'm not certain that the RFC 2119 keywords have been applied consistently.
For example, this seems as if it should be MUST NOT:

   However, to prevent routing-loops, L1L2 routers must not advertise
   L2->L1 inter-area routes that they learn via L1 routing, back into L2.

and maybe this should be SHOULD:

   Implementations that follow RFC 1195 should ignore bit 8 in the
   default metric field when computing routes.
 
This will matter if the document is later promoted to Draft Standard
(which for such an old specification could be quite soon).

6.  Security Considerations

   This document raises no new security issues for IS-IS.

Maybe add a reference to the Security Considerations of RFC 1195?