Charlie,
Thanks Charlie for all the editorials. I have incoporated most.
Additional comments inline.
6/12/2014 12:24 AM, Charles E. Perkins kirjoitti:
Hello folks,
I reviewed the charter, and found numerous little stylistic
improvements. Most of my revisions were along the lines of
rewording the same thought to eliminate ambiguity or make
grammatical corrections. I've attached a diff file to show all
of the suggested revisions. I hope this is a reasonable format
my suggestions. Even though such things are minor, getting
them right is very helpful for accurately expressing the ideas.
Here are some most substantial comments, which are also
embedded in my revised file:
/* What about RFC 5568 (FMIP)? */
There is the "..such as.." so I think there is no really need to lost
all possible MIP6 variations.
"Routing based proposals must not propagate routing
updates outside the IGP routing domain."
/* Does this disallow Binding Update? */
Should not.. if you refer to MIP style tunnel management binding updates.
/* What does "eventually" mean?? */
erm.. removed..
Also, the suggested dates for chartered work items seem
quite unrealistic to me.
;-) +3 months?
I noticed that part of the charter fit nicely in my 80-column
(vi) text window, and part of the charter does not fit nicely.
I could also fix that if desired.
Fixed.
- Jouni
Regards,
Charlie P.
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
dmm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
