Subject: [Gen-art] review of draft-haleplidis-forces-implementation-experience-02.txt

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 16:34:29 +0200

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-haleplidis-forces-implementation-experience-02.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 20110509
IETF LC End Date: 20110503
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary: Ready

Major issues: None

Minor issues: None

Nits/editorial comments:
 - Abstract page 1: forwarding -> Forwarding

 - ToC page 2 (English -> US spelling):
  Developement -> Development
  Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments

 - 2 page 4: even with the section 1 just before I am not convinced
  it is useless to introduce FE and CE abbrevs.

 - 2 page 4: inconsitent singular/plural in
  "[RFC5812] presents a formal way to define FE Logical Functional
   Blocks (LFBs) using XML.  LFB configuration components, capabilities,
   and associated events are defined when the LFB is formally created.
   The LFBs within the Forwarding Element (FE) are accordingly
   controlled in a standardized way by the ForCES protocol."

 I suggest "when LFBs are formally created."

 - 2 page 4: etc. -> etc, ???

 - 2.1 page 4 (bad wording):
   protocol and model and its main goal
 -> protocol and model, and its main goal ?

 - 3.2 page 7: IPSec -> IPsec

 - 3.3 page 7: develeper -> developer

 - 3.3 page 7: new components etc -> new components, etc

 - 3.3.1 page 8: deconstructor -> destructor

 - 3.3.1 page 9: difficulty lie -> difficulty lies

 - 3.4.2 pages 14 and 15 (multiple): "Do this" is not wellcome in a
  formal description, it should be a goto X IMHO.

 - 3.4.2 page 14: mainheader -> main header ???

 - 3.4.2 page 14 (comment): as a previous Lisp/functional language
  programmer I am not very happy with an explanation about difficulty
  from recursion.

 - 3.4.2 page 15 (twice): it must have inside -> it must include

 - 4 page 17 (title): Developement -> Development

 - 5 page 18 (title): Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments

 - 7 page 20: IPSec -> IPsec

Regards

[email-masked]

PS: I forgot to send this in time, I apologize. BTW all the comments
and suggestions fall typically in the scope of the RFC Editor.