Matt, thanks for your review. Authors/WG, thanks for addressing Matt’s issues. I have entered a No Objection ballot.
Best, Alissa > On Oct 9, 2017, at 9:34 PM, Matthew Miller <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Reviewer: Matthew Miller > Review result: Ready with Issues > > 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-grow-bgp-gshut-11 > Reviewer: Matthew A. Miller > Review Date: 2017-10-09 > IETF LC End Date: 2017-10-11 > IESG Telechat date: N/A > > Summary: > > This document is ready to be published as an Informational document, but > there is one issue that I think clarification would help. > > Major issues: > > NONE > > Minor issues: > > In Section 4. "EBGP graceful shutdown procedure", it states that 0 can > used in all cases except where the AS already has a special meaning for > 0. It seems to me more ought to be said, but I admit I'm not well-versed > on (I) BGP and might be seeing dragons where only windmills are present. > > > Nits/editorial comments: > > * I suggest using RFC 8174 and its terminology boiler plate to help > disambiguate "may" versus "MAY". > > * A number of acronyms are used throughout without being spelled out (e.g., > RR, IBGP, FIB, EBGP, AS), but some (e.g., ASBR) are spelled out. I would > find it helpful to be consistent here, preferably by spelling them out on > first use. > > * In Section 1. "Introduction", second paragraph, the word "operation" > seems to be missing from the first sentence: > > """ > This document discusses operational procedures to be applied in order > to reduce or eliminate loss of packets during a maintenance. > """ > > * Throughout the Appendices, there are some inconsistent uses of some terms, > especially when compared to the rest of the document: > > - "Local-Pref" versus "LOCAL_PREF" > - "nexhop" versus "NEXT_HOP" > > * In Appendix A. "Alternative techniques with limited applicability", the > phrase "describe them" ought to be "describes them". > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
