Dear Behcet, Thanks a lot for the review. Much appreciated. We addressed the editorial comments together with the comments from Mahesh and Paul as following:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/diff?doc_1=draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-17&url_2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/network-analytics/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry/refs/heads/main/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-18.txt Best wishes Thomas -----Original Message----- From: Behcet Sarikaya via Datatracker <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, May 9, 2025 5:24 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-17 early Genart review Be aware: This is an external email. Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry Title: Export of Delay Performance Metrics in IP Flow Information eXport (IPFIX) Reviewer: Behcet Sarikaya Review result: Ready with Nits This document defines new IPFIX IEs to export measured delay. It is well written with a few nits. Nits: Introduction: par. 4 IPIFX -> IPFIX draft-fz-spring-srv6-alt-mark-10 new release 11 exists srhActiveSegmentIPv6 and srhIPv6ActiveSegment both seem to mean Active SRv6 Segment and also they are the same? Table 2: R3 and R4 have the same address, not sure if there is an issue there? Section 5 starts referring to IEs with their IDs with no explanation
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
