Should have copied this to PALS as well, just for info. > -----Original Message----- > From: Pals [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: 28 December 2014 17:15 > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [Pals] AD review of draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-evpn > > Sorry for sitting on this so long: a number of other things got in the > way. > > I have done my usual AD review and don't have anything substantial. I'll > start the IETF last call (longer than 2 weeks because of the holiday > season) and you can fix any nits when convenient. > > Thanks for the work, > Adrian > > === > > The RFC editor will require that the Contributors section is moved to > the end per the latest version of their style guide. I don't think you > need to do that now unless you have the document open for edits. > > --- > > 7.4.1 uses AC without expansion. > > --- > > Section 9.3 was a good read :-) > > --- > > Section 10 needs to point at Section 4 (not Section 3). > I don't really like the title of Section 10 - too much of a sales pitch. > > Maybe... > > 10. Assessing PBB-EVPN Against the Requirements > > In this section, we discuss how the PBB-EVPN solution addresses the > requirements set forth in section 4 above. > > Although I did wonder why the sub-sections in section 10 were not in > one-to-one correspondence with those in section 4. > > --- > > The figures seem to be numbered 1, 2, 8, 7, 9 which may be seen as a > trifle idiosyncratic. > > --- > > Ali and Lizhong had an email exchange with a nit to be fixed. > > _______________________________________________ > Pals mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
