Hi Christer,
Thanks for the rewiew. v12 of the drafts should solve your comments.
General:
-----------
Q_G_1: The document says "ITU-T recommendation G.XXX", "ITU-T
G.XXX", and "G.XXX". Please use consistent terminology.
Authors> ITU-T recommendation G.XXX used on first use and then
just G.XXX
Section 3:
-------------
Q_3_1: The text says "ITU-T recommendation defines". I guess
that shall be G.709?
Authors> Right, substituted with: G.709-2012
BR
Daniele
From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: giovedì 26 settembre 2013 10:12
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Genart review of draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-11
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART,
please see the FAQ at <
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a
new version of the draft.
Document: draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-11
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review Date: 26 September 2013
IETF LC End Date: 19 September, 2013
IESG Telechat date: N/A
Summary: The document is well written, and ready for publication, but
contains some editorial issues that I suggest that the authors consider
addressing.
Major issues: -
Minor issues: -
Nits/editorial comments:
General:
-----------
Q_G_1: The document says "ITU-T recommendation G.XXX", "ITU-T
G.XXX", and "G.XXX". Please use consistent terminology.
Section 3:
-------------
Q_3_1: The text says "ITU-T recommendation defines". I guess
that shall be G.709?
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
