Thank you for your detailed review Tom! Cheers T.
Sent from my iPhone > On 15 Jul 2015, at 07:59, Tom Taylor <[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 resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments > you may receive. > > Document: draft-vinapamula-softwire-dslite-prefix-binding-07 > Reviewer: Tom Taylor > Review Date: 2015-07-15 > IETF LC End Date: 2015-08-05 > IESG Telechat date: 2015-08-20 > > Summary: technically straightforward and well written with nits and a minor > issue. Most of the nits are to make the text sound better to an anglophone > ear. > > Major issues: > > Minor issues: > > In the Security Considerations section, it might be appropriate to discuss > the security (privacy?) consequences of misdirected traffic due to address > change (if the recommendations are not implemented), and to prefix change in > any event. > > Nits/editorial comments: > > Sec. 1, para 1, fourth line: s/that is/which is/ > > Sec. 1, next-to-last para: > OLD > to avoid the same prefix be assigned to the same customer > NEW > to avoid assigning the same prefix to the same customer > > Sec. 2, second para, second line: s/may be/maybe/ > " " , fifth line: s/no more/no longer/ > > Sec. 2, fourth para, second line: missing "of" after "fairness" > " " , eighth line, missing "changes" after "IPv6 address" > > Sec. 2, fourth para: the sentence > "To that aim, a subscriber should be identified by the > AFTR based upon the IPv6 prefix assigned to the corresponding CPE, > and not according to the derived B4's IPv6 address." > introduces a solution to the problem (redundantly, since that solution is > stated at the end of the section) rather than simply identifying the problem. > May I suggest replacing it with: > "If the derived B4's IPv6 address can change, resource tracking using that > address will give incomplete results." > > Sec. 3, second para, third line: s/to configure/configuring/ > > Sec. 4, bullet 1, indented para, first line: s/to mount/from mounting/ > " " " fourth line: s/quota was/quota were/ > Subjunctive voice is grammatically correct here, but less commonly > used these days, so the suggestion is totally optional. > > Sec. 4, bullet 2, fourth line: missing "a" in front of "configured". > > Sec. 4, bullet 3, sixth line: missing "the" in front of "B4's". > > Sec. 4, bullet 6, sixth line: missing "having" in front of "to redirect", or > alternatively, s/to redirect/redirecting/. > > In the Acknowledgements section there is an XML2RFC issue with extra spaces > after the periods delimiting the initials. Or is this the result of applying > the space fixing program available on the Tools page? _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
