Hi Matthew, I have made changes along the lines you requested and a couple of other minor improvements including the update form the IPR poll. See version -09.
Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA [email protected] On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 6:16 AM Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) < [email protected]> wrote: > Authors > > > > As is customary, here is my document shepherd review of this draft. Please > treat these comments as you would any other WG last call comments. > > > > Once you have addressed these, I plan to move forward with the next stage > of publication. > > > > Comments: > > - I think it would be helpful to add a statement to the end of the > abstract describing the purpose of this draft i.e. why are we publishing it > as an RFC? I believe the consensus was that the purpose is to document the > considerations taken by the NVO3 encapsulation design team for the benefit > of the IETF community, in particular to help with future deliberations by > working groups over the choice of encapsulation formats. > - Section 5: Encapsulation Issues and Background. The first sentence > says that the issues were summarised by the WG chairs. I think it would be > more accurate to say that these issues were discussed by the working group. > > > > Thanks > > > > Matthew >
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
