Authors, Fortunately Francis has not found any issues of substance. Please fold these nits into the revision you are producing to address the IESG Comments from last Thursday's telechat.
Thanks, Adrian > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] Behalf OfFrancis Dupont > Sent: 09 February 2015 13:19:22 (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community-09.txt > > 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-l3vpn-acceptown-community-09.txt > Reviewer: Francis Dupont > Review Date: 20150206 > IETF LC End Date: 20141208 > IESG Telechat date: 20150205 > > Summary: Ready > > Major issues: None > > Minor issues: None > > Nits/editorial comments: > - Abstract page 1: VRF and PE are not well known abbrevs > (cf http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt) > > - Abstract page 1 (style): I suggest: > that is distributed by the route reflector > -> > that the route reflector distributes > > - Abstract page 1 (style): > on the same PE as -> on the same PE than > > - Abstract page 1 (style): > (second) allowing the technique to be used -> and to be used > > - 1 page 2: same comment about "that is distributed" > > - 1 page 3: the abbrev PE (Provider Edge) must be introduced at its > first use (in the body of the document). > > - 3 page 4: i.e. -> i.e., > > Regards > > [email protected] _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
