Excellent, thanks! > On Oct 24, 2018, at 4:29 PM, Vigoureux, Martin (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay) > <martin.vigour...@nokia.com> wrote: > > Ben, > > thank you for your review. > Regarding your substantive COMMENT: the disclosure came at the time of > WG adoption. The WG was thus specifically informed of that and given an > extra week to (re)consider the positions already expressed. > > The existence of the IPR was also mentioned and referenced in the WG > Last Call e-mail. > > -m > > Le 2018-10-24 à 23:02, Ben Campbell a écrit : >> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track-12: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track/ >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Thanks for the work on this! >> >> *** Substantive Comments *** >> >> I support Mirja's DISCUSS. >> >> - There is an IPR disclosure with possible royalties. The shepherd report >> says >> there were no WG objections. How was the disclosure communicated? For >> example, >> was the WG reminded of the disclosure at WGLC? >> >> *** Editorial Comments *** >> >> §3: >> - Part way through the section, starting with "We also introduce a new >> notion, >> the "match for tracking":", there is a section of text that has a >> significantly >> different tone from the rest of the draft. It switches more of a lecture >> style, >> then switches back. I suggest an edit pass to keep a consistent tone. (I >> know >> this is a question of style, and I will not press it further if people prefer >> not to change it.) >> >> - 2 paragraphs starting with "For a given C-flow..." >> Why is this indented? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BESS mailing list >> BESS@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
