Subject: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirement-10.txt

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 18:15:38 +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-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirement-10.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 20130617
IETF LC End Date: 20130619
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary: Ready

Major issues: None

Minor issues: None

Nits/editorial comments:
 - ToC page 3 and 7 page 12: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments

 - 2 page 4: double include words in:

   The services supported include pseudowire based services (RFC 3985
   [RFC3985]), including VPN services,

 I suggest something like:

   The supported services are, but not limited to, pseudowire based
   services (RFC 3985 [RFC3985]), including VPN services,

 - 3 page 5 (component link): the term NPO is used before being defined

 - 3 page 5 (component link): expand the WDM abbrev -- not well known
  according tothe RFC Editor list:
  http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt

 - 3 page 5 (flow identification): same for the PW abbrev

 - 4.1 page 6: CAN -> MAY

 - 6 page 12 (MR#10) -> interpretted -> interpreted

 - 9 page 13: Encrption -> Encryption

 - Authors' Addresses: add the country (USA) in postal addresses

Regards

[email-masked]

---

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 14:02:51 -0400

In message <[email-masked]>
 
> IESG Telechat date: unknown

OK.  Thanks but it appears the document is headed back to another WGLC
due to other comments, mostly due to the RtgDir review comments.

>  - ToC page 3 and 7 page 12: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments

It appears that both spellings are acceptable according to my spell
checker.  I will leave as is unless there is continued objection.

>    services (RFC 3985 [RFC3985]), including VPN services,

Thank you.  I will make this change.

>  - 3 page 5 (flow identification): same for the PW abbrev

A last call comment from our AD is to expand all acronyms before use.
The SecDir comments also requested this.

>  - 4.1 page 6: CAN -> MAY

Thank you.  I will make this change.

>  - 6 page 12 (MR#10) -> interpretted -> interpreted

Thank you.  My spell checker agrees.  I will make this change.

>  - 9 page 13: Encrption -> Encryption

Thank you.  I obviously didn't make spell check corrections in a
recent edit.  I will make this change.

I will also do a full spell check and see what else the spell checker
find.  (I am using International Ispell Version 3.3.02 12 Jun 2005
with English and American English dictionary files).

>  - Authors' Addresses: add the country (USA) in postal addresses

Thank you.  I will make this change.

> [email-masked]

Thank you for the review of this document.

Curtis

---

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 22:00:18 -0400

Francis,

This draft is headed back to WGLC, but I edited in the changes that
you suggested, except as noted.  See inline.

>  - ToC page 3 and 7 page 12: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments

Acceptabel spelling AFAIK.

>    services (RFC 3985 [RFC3985]), including VPN services,

This section was moved to the companion draft "Composite Link Use
Cases and Design Considerations" at the request of the RtgDir review
but the change has been made in that document.

>  - 3 page 5 (component link): the term NPO is used before being defined

The term NPO conflicts with ITU-T usage of the term and is no longer
used (another change prompted by the RtgDir review).

>   http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt

The paragraph provides non-essential discussion and was moved
out of the definition and appears after the set of definitions.  The
acronyms were in a "for example" context and are now removed.

The text now reads:

   A Component Link may be a point-to-point physical link (where a
   "physical link" includes one or more link layer plus a physical
   layer) or a logical link that preserves ordering in the steady
   state.  A component link may have transient out of order events,
   but such events must not exceed the network's Performance
   Objectives.  For example, a compoent link may be comprised of any
   supportable combination of link layers over a physical layer or
   over logical sub-layers, including those providing physical layer
   emulation.

The examples given used the terms WDM, Ethernet, VLAN, SONET, and OTN
but the examples are now gone.

>  - 3 page 5 (flow identification): same for the PW abbrev

Done.

>  - 4.1 page 6: CAN -> MAY

Done.

>  - 9 page 13: Encrption -> Encryption

These two corrections were made.  A spell check of the entire document
was done and it caught a few more errors.

>  - Authors' Addresses: add the country (USA) in postal addresses

Done

> [email-masked]

Thank you for the review.  Please let me know if the changes are
acceptable.

Curtis