5 Jun 2012 21:28
Fwd: Gen-ART Review:draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-08.txt
Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes <at> gmail.com>
2012-06-05 19:28:02 GMT
2012-06-05 19:28:02 GMT
And, the response didn't make it either, of course.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) <cpignata <at> cisco.com>
Date: Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Review:draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-08.txt
To: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes <at> gmail.com>
Cc: "<draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm.all <at> tools.ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm.all <at> tools.ietf.org>
From: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) <cpignata <at> cisco.com>
Date: Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Review:draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-08.txt
To: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes <at> gmail.com>
Cc: "<draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm.all <at> tools.ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm.all <at> tools.ietf.org>
Mary,
Done. Thanks again.
Many thanks for the review! Much appreciated -- please see inline:
On Jun 4, 2012, at 6:34 PM, Mary Barnes 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>.Document: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-08.txtReviewer: Mary BarnesReview Date: 4 June 2012IETF LC End Date: 29 May 2012IESG Telechat Date: 07 June 2012
Summary: Ready with minor nitsEditorial nits:1) Section 1:- 2nd para, last sentence:This sentence doesn't quite parse - it's not normative, so it should either be deleted or reworded. I suggest deleting as I think it's somewhat superfluous.
Agreed E_PARSE. I recommend we do not delete because it introduces the concept that this is for Basic Discovery. However, suggest:
Therefore, GTSM can fully benefit LDP protocol peering session
established using Basic Discovery.
to:
Therefore, GTSM can protect an LDP protocol peering session
established using Basic Discovery.
Thank you.
- Next to last paragraph - last three sentences - a little verbose & somewhat redundant. I think it can be summarized something like the following:OLD:This document specifies a "built-in dynamic GTSMcapability negotiation" for LDP to suggest the use of GTSM. GTSMwill be used as specified in this document provided both peers on anLDP session can detect each others' support for GTSM procedures andagree to use it. That is, the desire to use GTSM (i.e., itsnegotiation mechanics) is enabled by default without anyconfiguration.NEW:This document specifies a dynamic GTSMcapability negotiation mechanism for LDP. This mechanism allowsboth peers on an LDP session to indicate the support and use of GTSMwithout requiring any configuration.
This one I prefer to leave as-is, although appears as redundant in the surface, it is agreed and crafted with some precision.
2) Section 2.2, 1st para, last sentence: "and RECOMMENDED" -> "and are RECOMMENDED"
Adrian, I have these editorials in the working copy committed. I can submit a new rev at your request.
Thanks,
-- Carlos.
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art <at> ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
RSS Feed