Russ, Hi! Much Thanks for the review! We just posted a new rev (-07) to address your comments. Please do go through the diffs ( https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-shared-labels-07.txt) and let us know if the new version adequately addresses your concern.
The term "loose hop" was introduced in RFC3209. So we just added a reference to it in the relevant sentence. Regards, -Pavan (on behalf of the authors) On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 1:29 PM Russ Housley <[email protected]> wrote: > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review result: Ready > > 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-mpls-rsvp-shared-labels-06 > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review Date: 2018-11-30 > IETF LC End Date: 2018-12-11 > IESG Telechat date: unknown > > Summary: Ready > > > Major Concerns: > > None > > > Minor Concerns: > > Section 5.3: To understand this section, I had to learn about "loose > hops" from other sources. Please consider adding this term to the ones > that are defined in Section 2. > > > Nits: > > Throughout document: s/hop by hop/hop-by-hop/ > > Section 5.3.1: s/The net result is that by/As a result, by/ > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
