Thanks for you review! I also noted your second point in my AD review to make sure it gets addressed!
> Am 25.07.2017 um 23:36 schrieb Robert Sparks <[email protected]>: > > Reviewer: Robert Sparks > Review result: Ready with Nits > > 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 wait for direction from your > document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-ietf-dmm-mag-multihoming-04 > Reviewer: Robert Sparks > Review Date: 2017-07-25 > IETF LC End Date: 2017-06-16 > IESG Telechat date: 2017-08-03 > > Summary: Ready with nits that should be addressed before publication as > Proposed Standard > > Thanks for addressing most of the points in my review of -03. > > There are still a couple of things that I think need attention: > > * In the second bullet of section 3.2 there is a sentence that does not make > sense. > Look at "or at When operating" in this sentence: > "Packet distribution can be done > either at the transport level, e.g. using MPTCP or at When > operating at the IP packet level, different packets distribution > algorithms are possible." > > * I still find the definitions of Interface Label and Binding Identifier > confusing. > I suspect they _both_ need to be carefully rewritten to make sure they are > definitions of the terms, and not descriptions of the interactions of the > two > fields. Why is the Interface Label definition talking so much about binding? > As currently written, that last sentence of the Binding Identifier > definition says the document says the mobile access gateway assigns > a single unique binding identifier for each of its interfaces. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
