I have a few small comments that I collected during my review as responsible AD.
Please address them as part of the IETF last call.
Thanks,
Adrian
===
I think your core reference [6] is supposed to refer to RFC 2236 for the
core definition of IGMPv2. That RFC certainly matches the name of the
document you have given.
[Hint: idnits is your friend!]
---
idnits complains about the 2119 boiler plate because you are missing a
space in
"RECOMMENDED","MAY",
---
Section 1 contains a clumsy sentence
To alleviate the problem, unsolicited
report messages are transmitted the [Robustness Variable] times
(defined in [2][3]).
How about
To alleviate this problem, unsolicited
report messages are retransmitted a number of times according to the
value of the [Robustness Variable] defined in [2] and [3].
---
Section 3
While *everyone* knows what S and G stand for, you should still say.
-----Original Message-----
From: pim-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:pim-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of The
IESG
Sent: 16 October 2013 21:46
To: IETF-Announce
Cc: pim(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: [pim] Last Call: <draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking-08.txt> (IGMP/MLD-
Based Explicit Membership Tracking Function for Multicast Routers) to Proposed
Standard
The IESG has received a request from the Protocol Independent Multicast
WG (pim) to consider the following document:
- 'IGMP/MLD-Based Explicit Membership Tracking Function for Multicast
Routers'
<draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking-08.txt> as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2013-11-06 (this is a 3 week last
call to allow
extra time as people are preparing for IETF-88). Exceptionally, comments
may be sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please
retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.