Hi Roni, Thanks for the prompt reaction.
If the split/merging discussion has already taken place, I don't want to bring it again, but I just found a bit artificial the separation in two documents (and now I see why). I see the point of implementation compliance with one RFC and not the other, but current text in RPR refers to protocol extensions defined in DRR, so we are not there either. As I see it (personal opinion) if we want to keep two separate documents, we still need some additional work on the wording of them, and we might end up duplicating some content. The merging approach would make the text cleaner, but would have the problem you pointed out. Thanks, Carlos On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 15:09 +0200, Roni Even wrote: > Hi Carlos, > Thanks for the review, we will look at the comments as for merging the > documents. Originally it was one document and it was a WG decision to split > it to allow implementation to be compliant with an RFC if they want only to > support DRR or RPR > Roni Even > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Carlos Jes?s Bernardos Cano > Sent: 22 January, 2013 1:51 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: [P2PSIP] Review of DRR and RPR documents > > Hi, > > As agreed during the last meeting, I've performed a review of > draft-ietf-p2psip-drr and draft-ietf-p2psip-rpr documents, prior to shipping > them to the IESG for publication. My reviews are attached to this e-mail (I > added comments to the PDF version of each draft, hope this is fine). > > I'd like authors to go through the comments before sending the documents to > the IESG. There might be some issues that need to be brought to the WG for > discussion. > > I'd also like to ask the WG for opinion on one particular aspect. I'm > wondering if it would be better to merge both documents into a single one. > Currently, both documents make quite a lot of cross-references, but still > there is duplicate text in both of them, so I'd be more in favor of merging > (personal opinion). Please, comment on this on the mailing list. > > Thanks, > > Carlos > _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
