The idnits issues link should have been:
https://tools.ietf.org/idnits?url=https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-aqm-codel-04.txt
Apologies for the copy-paste error.
On 9/14/2016 9:26 AM, Wesley Eddy wrote:
Hi, for awhile, the CoDel draft was in working group last call. Some
comments were received, and the authors made an update some time ago.
There hasn't been much follow-up discussion. I assume this means the
current draft meets people's expectations? If not, now is a good time
to shout, because I'm working on the shepherd write-up so that it can
be submitted to the IESG soon.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-codel/
There are a few small things I noticed while doing the shepherd write-up:
1) I thought the ADs and WG were happy to go Experimental rather than
Informational
(https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/aqm/current/msg01727.html ) ...
was there a reason from the authors that it didn't change?
2) Idnits has some minor issues
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/aqm/current/msg01727.html
a) it doesn't like the reference "[CODEL2012]" in the abstract
b) for referencing RFC 896, there's inconsistent "RFC896" vs
"RFC0896" (use the zero or don't, but it should match)
c) the "[CMNTS]" reference is unused
d) some of the obsolete references should be checked.
___
aqm mailing list
aqm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
