(Oops, sent from wrong account and ended up in moderation. Here it is
again. Sorry for the duplicates.)
Hi everyone,
For the record, Acee responded to my review off-list, and the preview
of version 9 of this draft addresses all of my comments to my
satisfaction.
Thanks!
Ben.
On Mar 20, 2008, at 11:20 AM, Ben Campbell wrote:
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-ospf-multi-area-adj-07
Reviewer: Ben Campbell
Review Date: 2008-03-20
IETF LC End Date: 2008-03-26
IESG Telechat date: (if known)
Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a proposed
standard. However, I have some editorial comments that should be
addressed first.
Comments:
Disclaimer: I am not an OSPF expert. I assume that others have
reviewed this draft for technical correctness.
-- General:
It would be helpful to see a little more coverage on the motivation
and background for this draft.
-- Details:
Abstract:
Please expand OSPF on first use.
Section 1.2:
The first sentence is confusing and redundant-please rephrase. Also,
"There could be a requirement..." seems like a pretty weak
motivation; does the requirement exist or not? Please add more
background and motivation for why the requirement exists.
Section 1.3, first paragraph:
Please expand OSPF on first use.
Paragraph 3, last sentence:
It's not clear why it might not be acceptable. Policy? Is the
support of p2plan inadequate, or uncommon?
Section 1.4, first paragraph, last sentence:
s/consistent/"in a manner consistent"
(or just "consistently")
Section 2.3:
It's not obvious what is intended here. Is this a complete
replacement of section 8.2? A replacement of certain paragraphs? I
can infer that you want to replace certain paragraphs by
examination, but please be explicit.
Also, it would be helpful to mention that this draft updates [OSPF]
in the abstract and/or introduction.
Section 3.1, last sentence:
Can you elaborate on what it means to be "cleaner from a deployment
standpoint"?
Section 4:
Are there no updates to RFC 2740?
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf