Thanks for your excellent review, Dan. Andrew, will you be issuing a new 
version based on the comments?

Jari

On 04 Sep 2015, at 08:00, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review 
> Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the 
> IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just like any other last call 
> comments.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal-05
> Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> Review Date: 9/4/15
> IETF LC End Date:
> IESG Telechat date:
> 
> Summary: this document is ready with minor issues
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> None
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> 1.       Section 3 includes the following text:
> 
>    When the PW CW is not used, the Type 4 MPLS VCCV Control Channel (CC)
>    type defined in this section MAY be used.  This is referred to as
>    VCCV CC Type4 throughout the rest of this of this document.  VCCV
>    Type 4 uses the encapsulation shown in Figure 1 in which the presence
>    of a GAL at the end of the MPLS label stack indicates that the packet
>    carries a VCCV message.
> 
> Two issues here:
> -          Line 3 includes a disturbing typo as the type is referred to in 
> the rest of the document as ‘VCCV CC Type 4’ (with a space)
> -          I understand the MAY in the second line to be directed to the 
> implementers and this is fine. However, what about the operators who own 
> network devices that have implemented this option? From reading the first 
> section I indirectly get that the operators SHOULD activate this option. 
> Maybe a separate paragraph can include this recommendation.
> 
> 2.       Manageability Considerations – is there a requirement for all 
> devices in a given network to activate the new type support, or a mix of 
> routers supporting and not-supporting this option does not cause a problem?
> 3.       Section 9.1 – I assume that at publication Bit X (0x0Y) is supposed 
> to be changed to Bit 3 (0x08)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

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

Reply via email to