Hi Gilles,
  Your changes look good to me. Go for them.

Thanks
Suresh

On 07/23/2012 08:08 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi Suresh,
> 
> Thanks for your review.
> 
> Please see my answers inline.
> 
> Best regards,
> --
> Gilles
> 
> 
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Suresh Krishnan [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Envoyé : mardi 17 juillet 2012 05:56
> À : [email protected]; General Area Review Team
> Objet : Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-cdni-use-cases-09.txt
> 
> 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?
> 
> [Gilles] I think that these lines are useful to help the reader identify the 
> importance of policy considerations 
> 
> * 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?
> 
> [Gilles] Thanks for the suggestion. "ingress" instead of "ingestion" may 
> indeed clarify the sentence. I'll do the change.
> 
> 
> 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?
> 
> [Gilles] "ISP" instead of "NSP" may indeed clarify the sentence. I'll do the 
> change.
> 
> 
> 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])
> 
> [Gilles] Ok for me. I'll do the change.
> 
> Thanks
> Suresh
> 
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu 
> ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> France Telecom - Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete 
> altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> 
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
> information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
> this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, France Telecom - Orange is not liable for messages 
> that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
> 


_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to