I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
< http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
Document: draft-ietf-conex-abstract-mech-13
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date: 1 Dec 2014
IETF LC End Date: past
IESG Telechat date: 4 Dec 2014
Summary: Ready for publication as an Informational RFC
This revision addresses my question below.
RjS
On 8/5/14 2:58 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-conex-abstract-mech-12
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date: 5-Aug-2014
IETF LC End Date: 8-Aug-2014
IESG Telechat date: Not on an upcoming telechat agenda
Summary: Ready for publication as Informational
This document handles a complex description problem in a very
accessible way.
Thank you for the effort that has gone into creating it.
One minor point to double-check:
This document goes out of its way to push decisions about measuring in
packets,
bytes, or other units to the concrete encoding proposals. RFC6789 was
explicit
about conex exposing a metric of congestion-volume measured in bytes.
RFC6789 was published a couple of years ago - has that part of it
become stale?
If so, it would be good for this document to explicitly call that out.
If not, (most of section 4.6 goes back to -04 which predates RFC6789),
does this document need to retain the this flexibility in its
description?