Matt, thanks for your review. Jordi, thanks for your responses. I entered a 
DISCUSS ballot concerning the use of capitalized keywords.

Alissa

> On Jan 2, 2019, at 10:29 PM, Matthew Miller <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Matthew Miller
> 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 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-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas-12
> Reviewer: Matthew A. Miller
> Review Date: 2019-01-02
> IETF LC End Date: 2018-12-14
> IESG Telechat date: 2019-01-10
> 
> Summary:  This document is ready to be published as Informational,
> but has some nits that should be addressed before publication.
> 
> Major issues: N/A
> 
> Minor issue:
> 
> There are some instances within the main content that RFC 2119
> keywords are present as lower case. If these are intentional, then
> RFC 8174 needs to be applied.
> 
> Nits/editorial comments: 
> 
> * In section 1. "Introduction" (and its subsections), the term "IPv6
> Transition CE Router" is not preceded with a definite or indefinite
> article, although it is throughout the rest of this document.
> * In section 1. "Introduction", the phrase "prohibitive expense"
> ought to be "prohibitively expensive".
> * In section 7. "Code Considerations", the word "neither" might be
> better as "nor" in the phrase "in terms of RAM memory, neither
> other hardware requirements".
> * In section 7. "Code Considerations", there seems to be a misplaced
> coma; "cost of NAT44 code so, existing hardware supports them with
> minimal impact" reads better as "cost of NAT44 code, so existing
> hardware supports them with minimal impact".
> * In section 11. "Annex A: Usage Scenarios", the comma seems
> unneeded in the phrase "another CE behind it, takes care of that".
> * In section 12. "Annex B: End-User Network Architecture", the
> term "end-user" should be used consistently, it is sometimes
> "end user".
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

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

Reply via email to