Hi Vijay,
Thanks for your time, a few comments below.
Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
> Document: draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-problem-solution-05.txt
> Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
> Review Date: 30 Mar 2008
> IESG Telechat date: 31 Mar 2008
>
> Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Proposed
> Standard.
>
> Couple of nits follow:
>
> - S1.6, page 9: s/abovementioned/above mentioned
>
> - S3.2.4, last paragraph: s/untypical/atypical
Ok. There was also another occurrence of 'abovementioned',
I've taken a note of that too.
> - S5.2, last bullet item: I could not quite follow the logic of
> how the bytes add up to 20. But that may be my unfamiliarity
> with the domain. I simply want to get the authors attention
> here in case there is something of consequence. If there
> is not, then please feel free to discard this comment.
I see the wording there is a bit vague. The first bullet list
identifies the different overheads of the various modes. The
maximum one of those (97 octets) is then broken down into its
components in the second bullet list (20 + 57 + 20).
My suggested fix would be to clarify the surrounding text a bit.
Change:
The overhead consists of the following:
To:
The maximum overhead of 97 octets in the 'cvc' access mode
consists of the following:
Thanks,
-Sami
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
