Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-07: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Editorial suggestions: Summary: In general the authors provide dense English text to describe this rules. In general the English text contains valid complex sentences. However, a few things should be suggested: 1) PTA – define it in a definition section or spell out the abbreviation 2) Phrases like “the RT RT-R” become overly dense. Use “Route Target RT-R”. 3) Breaking up section 6.2.1 – with subjection and subtitles would make it more readable, 4) P. 36 second paragraph. The reason for the “MUST” in 1st full paragraph is a bit vague. It seems logical, but the reasoning is just vague in the text. 5) paragraph 2 in page 47 (section 7.3.1) is awkward, please reword. 6) Paragraph 5 in page 47 (section 7.3.1) – does not explain why the condition should hold. The authors have done this in eac other case, so it seems inconsistent. 7) Page 53 – section 7.4.5 paragraph 3 “VRF route Import EC” – please spell out first usage and give abbreviation (VRF Route Import Extended Community (EC). _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
