The -09 has been published and should address your comment. Feel free to raise any additional concern.
Brgds, -----Original Message----- From: Tomonori Takeda [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2018 10:13 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: RtgDir review: draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-08.txt Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through discussion or by updating the draft. Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-08.txt Reviewer: Tomonori Takeda Review Date: Dec. 17th, 2018 IETF LC End Date: Dec. 18th, 2018 Intended Status: Informational Summary: This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be considered prior to publication. Comments: This document analyzes the impact of SPF delay algorithm and associated triggers on IGP micro-loops. This document presents useful information on how mixing strategies may lead to longer micro-loops. The document is well organized, easy to read. Major Issues: None Minor Issues: None Nits: 1) Section 2 says "That part may be the main part for the first iteration but is not for subsequent IGP events. In addition, this part is very implementation specific and difficult/impossible to standardize, while the SPF delay algorithm may be standardized." It would be better to explain what "That part" and "this part" mean. I guess the text should look like: "The time to update the FIB may be the main part for the first iteration of IGP event but is not for subsequent IGP events. In addition, the time to update the FIB is very implementation specific and difficult/impossible to standardize, while the SPF delay algorithm may be standardized." Thanks, Tomonori Takeda _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
