Thanks for your review. Do the authors have any comments on these observations?
Jari On 29 Dec 2014, at 22:13, Martin Thomson <[email protected]> wrote: > 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-ospf-te-metric-extensions-09 > Reviewer: Martin Thomson > Review Date: 2014-12-29 > IETF LC End Date: 2014-12-24 (nice) > IESG Telechat date: 2015-01-08 > > Summary: Good for PS with some minor issues. > > Observations: > > I find it a little disappointing that measurement techniques are so > nebulously defined. Values are measured over "a period" using "some > method, which might be RFC 6374". The "A" bit threshold is "a > configured value". That means that a consumer of this information has > to take a lot on faith. I have to assume that this is because we > can't do better. > > Minor issues: > Please ensure that all the field descriptions include some textual > indication of the size of the field. Type and length are always 16 > bits each, so those can be assumed from RFC 3630. > > As above, please specify the specific IEEE 754 floating point format, > i.e., "single precision". Otherwise you have to look at the figures > to work out how many bits to use for the value and figures should be > strictly informational. > > Nits: > Section 10 is missing a period. > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
