Subject: [Gen-art] [gen-art] review: draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis-06.txt

From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 11:44:17 -0400

(As all comments are minor, and there are many authors, I am directing 
this to the shepherd rather than copying all the authors and WG.)

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-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis-06.txt
     Presence Interdomain Scaling Analysis for SIP/SIMPLE
Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
Review Date: 26-June-2009
IETF LC End Date: 6-July-2009
IESG Telechat date: N/A

Summary: This document is probably ready for publication as an 
Informational RFC.  If revisions are needed, some minor items should be 
considered.

Major issues:

Minor issues:
	I think that I do not understand how the document uses the term "day". 
  c01 is the average lifetime of a subscription.  However, it also seems 
to be the definition of day in section 2.3.5.  This is not a big deal as 
it seems to normalize out when one looks at the per-second numbers.  But 
it seems to make the "per day" numbers confusing.  I suspect that what 
is needed is simply a definition of "day" for this document.

Nits/editorial comments:
	The introduction has multiple examples of unusual English language 
usages.  They are not listed here, but are left to the editors to 
analyze and resolve.  (This problem continues at a lower frequency 
throughout the document.)
	Section 2.3.5 labels the third bottom line value as B02 instead of B03.
	The third line in section 3.1.3 should have a comma in the 23437M 
number for readability.

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:34:27 -0500

Hi Avshalom,

Can you respond to Joel's question about the definition of "day"?

Thanks!

Ben.

On Jun 26, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:

> (As all comments are minor, and there are many authors, I am  
> directing this to the shepherd rather than copying all the authors  
> and WG.)
>
> Informational RFC.  If revisions are needed, some minor items should  
> be considered.
>
> Major issues:
>
> Minor issues:
> 	I think that I do not understand how the document uses the term  
> "day".  c01 is the average lifetime of a subscription.  However, it  
> also seems to be the definition of day in section 2.3.5.  This is  
> not a big deal as it seems to normalize out when one looks at the  
> per-second numbers.  But it seems to make the "per day" numbers  
> confusing.  I suspect that what is needed is simply a definition of  
> "day" for this document.
>
> Nits/editorial comments:

---

From: Avshalom Houri <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 23:42:57 +0300

Joel,

Thanks for reviewing this long document.

Will resolve the comments as part of a next revision after the last call.

Thanks
--Avshalom

From:
"Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
To:
Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>, General Area Review Team 
<[email-masked]>, Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date:
26/06/2009 06:46 PM
Subject:
[Gen-art] [gen-art] review: 
draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis-06.txt
Sent by:
[email-masked]

Major issues:

Minor issues:
                 I think that I do not understand how the document uses 
the term "day". 

Nits/editorial comments:
                 The introduction has multiple examples of unusual English 
language 
usages.  They are not listed here, but are left to the editors to 
analyze and resolve.  (This problem continues at a lower frequency 
throughout the document.)
                 Section 2.3.5 labels the third bottom line value as B02 
instead of B03.
                 The third line in section 3.1.3 should have a comma in 
the 23437M 
number for readability.
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art