Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-nvo3-evpn-applicability-05: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nvo3-evpn-applicability/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Abstract: I find the "Conclusion" section (with the word 'justifies' replaced with 'documents') a clearer Abstract of the document than the current Abstract. Maybe move the Conclusion as Abstract, and move some technical details of the current Abstract to the Introduction? Section 1: TOR/Leaf switches I had to follow the link a few sentences down to RFC 7365 to realize TOR here does not mean Tor Onion Routing but Top of Rack switch. RFC 7365 uses "ToR" and not "TOR" as well. So maybe expand and fix the capitalization. Section 2: The terminology is listed alphabetically, but some items are referred in items before they are explained. It might be better to re-order them. But perhaps not - me as a newbie in this space didn't know any, but perhaps people familiar with terms find this sorting method easier to use when reading the document. NVO3 tunnels or simply Overlay tunnels will be used interchangeably Why not stick to one term for simplicity ? _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
