Hi Francis, Sorry, my verison numbers are all off by 1 :-(
The currently posted version is -11. I expect a -12 to be posted very soon. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA [email protected] On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Donald Eastlake <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Francis, > > I believe your comments are resolved in the -10 version of this draft. I > expect a -11 version to be posted soon with a few other minor improvements. > So, you might want to check the current -10 version or the -11 version when > it is posted. > > Thanks, > Donald > =============================== > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 <(508)%20333-2270> (cell) > 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA > [email protected] > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Francis Dupont < > [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 >> >> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. >> >> Document: draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-10.txt >> Reviewer: Francis Dupont >> Review Date: 20171209 >> IETF LC End Date: 20171212 >> IESG Telechat date: unknown >> >> Summary: Ready with Issues >> >> Major issues: None >> >> Minor issues: C-nickname is used before being defined >> >> Nits/editorial comments: >> - Abstract page 1: please expand the RPF abbrev >> >> - Abstract page 1 and 1 page 3: Mutlicast -> Multicast >> >> - ToC page 2 and 3 title page 5: >> Centralized Replication Solution Overview -> Centralized replication >> solution overview >> (mainly for consistency) >> >> - ToC page 2 and 6 title page 8: a edge group -> an edge group >> (It seems both are accepted?) >> >> - ToC page 2 and 9 title page 12: I have a little concern with the >> CMT abbrev which BTW is not in the RFC Editor list >> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt) >> I suggest to add "(RFC 7783)" after CMT >> >> - ToC page 3 and 10 title page 13: >> Network Upgrade Analysis -> Network upgrade analysis >> (still consistency) >> >> - 1 page 3: at the first read it was not obvious that RBv is just the >> notation for a virtual RBridge. I suggest to do the same than for RBn, >> i.e., to change the first occurrence from RBv to (RBv). >> >> - 1 page 3: my US English spell checker does not accept learnt >> (it wants learned ???) >> >> - 2 page 4: please move from RFC 2119 to its update RFC 8174 >> >> - 2 page 4: LAALP -Local -> LAALP - Local >> >> - 3 page 5 title: cf ToC comment >> >> - 3 page 5: " BUM packet should be..." an example of a lower case >> "should" which can take benefit of RFC 8174 (vs RFC 2119). Note >> there are two other "should"s next page and a "may" in 4 (and other >> lower case keywords). >> >> - 3 page 6: C-nickname is used without explanation of what it is >> (the explanation is in 9 page 12 so far later). Some words and/or >> a forward reference should solve the issue. >> >> - 8 page 11 (last line): nodes/ multiple -> nodes / multiple >> >> - 9 page 12 title: cf ToC comment >> >> - 9 page 12: CMT -> Coordinated Multicast Trees (CMT) >> (at the first occurrence, i.e., first line after figure 2) >> >> - 9 page 12: the definition of C-nickname is here. >> BTW you use both C-flag and C-nickname flag, the second is not >> very correct from a language point of view but is very clear >> technically so I shan't object if you keep it. >> >> - 10 page 13 title: cf ToC comment >> >> - 11 page 13: psudo -> pseudo >> >> - Authors' Addresses page 17 (two occurrences): China -> PR China >> (or you can switch all countries to ISO IS 3166 two letter codes) >> >> Regards >> >> [email protected] >> > >
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
