Hi Brian, thanks. I've submitted a new version without the nits (I applied "RFC nnnn" notation for non-reference mentions).
Regards, Ruediger The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-09 -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[email protected]] Gesendet: Montag, 29. August 2016 06:47 An: [email protected]; General Area Review Team Betreff: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-08 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-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-08.txt Reviewer: Brian Carpenter Review Date: 2016-08-29 IETF LC End Date: 2016-09-08 IESG Telechat date: Summary: Ready with nits -------- Comments: --------- 1. I was co-chair of the original diffserv WG, and I have tracked this draft throughout its life and influenced some of its content. I have re-read it carefully for this review. 2. I believe it is correctly positioned as Informational. It might become a candidate for BCP with deployment experience. Nits: ----- Section 4 mentions RFC2575, certainly a typo for RFC2475. Non-reference mentions of RFCs are inconsistent, e.g. both "RFC4594" and "RFC 4594" occur. _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
