On Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Scott Brim wrote:
Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits
that should be fixed before publication.
Thanks Scott,
Review:
This is very good. Disregarding a few non-technical concerns about
presentation, I only have a couple of technical nits that the RFC
editor might not catch. Since they are small I'm only sending this to
gen-art, author and AD.
2.1.1:
Change "PIM-SSM" to "PIM-SM".
Not sure if I understand this comment. I guess you're referring to
"xxx; PIM-SSM is a subset of PIM-SM." but I don't understand why SSM
should be changed to SM. Yep, it's sometimes confusing that people
use the term PIM-SSM to refer to the part of PIM-SM spec that's needed
if you did only SSM, but I guess it can't be helped.
2.1.4:
"Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol (DVMRP) [RFC1075]
[I-D.ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3] [I-D.ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-as] was the first
protocol designed for multicasting, and to get around initial
deployment hurdles. It also included tunneling capabilities which
were part of its multicast topology functions."
Is this supposed to be one sentence? If not, I don't understand
the end of the first sentence.
Oops, thanks for catching this. I think the last part of the sentence
was intended to be the part of the next one but in editing it got
inserted after the wrong line.
The text in my working copy now reads:
"... was the first protocol designed for multicasting. To get around
initial deployment hurdles, it also included tunneling capabilities
which were part of its multicast topology functions."
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
