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-rtgwg-lf-conv-frmwk-05
Reviewer:
Ben Campbell
Review Date: 2009-09-03
IETF LC End Date: 2009-09-04
IESG Telechat date: (if known)
Summary: This document is mostly ready for publication as an
informational RFC. There are a few nits and editorial issues that
would be helpful to address first.
Major issues:
None
Minor issues:
None
Nits/editorial comments:
-- Section 1, general:
It would be helpful to have a paragraph describing the purpose of this
document. Is it just to educate? Draw a conclusion? Help some audience
make a decision?
-- Paragraph 1:
Please expand LDP on first use.
-- Paragraph 3:
Can you define "micro-loop"? (or contrast it with "loop")
Please expand "TE" on first use.
-- section 2, paragraph 1: "Cyclic loops may occur..."
Are there non-cyclic loops?
-- 2nd to last paragraph: "congestion loss"
Did you mean "congestion" or "packet loss"?
-- section 3, last paragraph:
Please expand IGP on first use.
-- section 4, 8th paragraph: "packet monitoring method, which
detects that a packet is looping and drops it"
s/", which"/"that"
-- section 5.1: It's a bit odd to have a single subsection all by
itself.
-- section 5.1, second to last paragraph:
Is there a reference for the simulations? Also, I would avoid all caps
in "REDUCES" as all-caps is typically used for normative assertions.
-- last paragraph:
Can you describe more what you mean by "good-news" and "bad-news"
events? I can guess, but it's better to be explicit.
-- 6.1, first paragraph:
s/"can be proved"/"can be proven"
Also, is there a reference for such a proof?
-- 6.3, 2nd paragraph:
Confusing line break. Is it the "not-via" mechanism, or is a typo?
Maybe quotes around "not-via" would help (or a space before the
reference to move the line break.)
10, 4th paragraph:
s/"…methods distributed…"/"…methods, distributed..."
-- idnits reports the following:
Miscellaneous warnings:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
== The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work,
but was
first submitted before 10 November 2008. Should you add the
disclaimer?
(See the Legal Provisions document at
http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.).
Checking references for intended status: Informational
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
== Outdated reference: A later version (-04) exists of
draft-ietf-rtgwg-ipfrr-notvia-addresses-03
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf