On 2 Dec 2015, at 20:30, Xuxiaohu wrote:
Hi Ben,
Thanks for your comments. Please see my response inline.
[...]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just a couple of editorial comments:
- section 1, first paragraph, 2nd sentence:
The sentence is confusing, and may suffer from an editing or
copy-paste error.
I'm not sure what "costly at the risk" of means.
How about doing the following change:
OLD:
" It's generally admitted that IP renumbering of servers (i.e., VMs)
after
the migration is usually complex and costly at the risk of extending
the business downtime during the process of migration. "
NEW:
"It's generally admitted that IP renumbering of servers (i.e., VMs)
after
the migration is usually complex and costly."
That works to me, but see next comment.
Also, who "generally admits" this to be true?
I think the IETF community at least has admitted that. That's the
reason why NVo3 WG is formed and several LAN or subnet extension
proposals have been accepted by the IETF.
If so, then how about "The IETF community has recognized..."
Thanks!
Ben.
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
