I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-09.txt Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan Review Date: 2012/07/16 IESG Telechat date: 2012/07/19 Summary: This document is ready for publication as an Informational RFC but I have some comments. Minor ===== * Section 1.3 & Figure 1 The CSP-2 part of the text is really not a use case but a "non-use case". Does such text belong in this document? * Section 2.3 What does the word ingestion mean in this sentence? It usually means consumption but that usage does not fit since the CDN interconnection does not change end user traffic consumption points. Did you mean "ingress" instead? o Allow the ISP to influence and/or control the traffic ingestion points. * Section 2.4 I am not sure that there is a commonly agreed definition of NSP, but the use of the term NSP in this section does not fit with my understanding of NSP (it fits more with an ISP who provides broadband service to end users). Can you clarify why exactly the term NSP is used here? Editorial ========= * Introduction: I feel that the word motivate seems to be a better fit for this sentence than guide, OLD: The document can be used to guide the definition of the requirements (as documented in [I-D.ietf-cdni-requirements]) NEW: This document can be used to motivate the requirements (as documented in [I-D.ietf-cdni-requirements]) Thanks Suresh _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
