And, the response didn't make it either, of course. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) <cpign...@cisco.com> Date: Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 8:11 PM Subject: Re: Gen-ART Review:draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-08.txt To: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.bar...@gmail.com> Cc: "<draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm....@tools.ietf.org>" < draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm....@tools.ietf.org>
Mary, Many thanks for the review! Much appreciated -- please see inline: On Jun 4, 2012, at 6:34 PM, Mary Barnes wrote: I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at < http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm-08.txt Reviewer: Mary Barnes Review Date: 4 June 2012 IETF LC End Date: 29 May 2012 IESG Telechat Date: 07 June 2012 Summary: Ready with minor nits Editorial nits: 1) Section 1: - 2nd para, last sentence: This sentence doesn't quite parse - it's not normative, so it should either be deleted or reworded. I suggest deleting as I think it's somewhat superfluous. Agreed E_PARSE. I recommend we do not delete because it introduces the concept that this is for Basic Discovery. However, suggest: Therefore, GTSM can fully benefit LDP protocol peering session established using Basic Discovery. to: Therefore, GTSM can protect an LDP protocol peering session established using Basic Discovery. Thank you. - Next to last paragraph - last three sentences - a little verbose & somewhat redundant. I think it can be summarized something like the following: OLD: This document specifies a "built-in dynamic GTSM capability negotiation" for LDP to suggest the use of GTSM. GTSM will be used as specified in this document provided both peers on an LDP session can detect each others' support for GTSM procedures and agree to use it. That is, the desire to use GTSM (i.e., its negotiation mechanics) is enabled by default without any configuration. NEW: This document specifies a dynamic GTSM capability negotiation mechanism for LDP. This mechanism allows both peers on an LDP session to indicate the support and use of GTSM without requiring any configuration. This one I prefer to leave as-is, although appears as redundant in the surface, it is agreed and crafted with some precision. 2) Section 2.2, 1st para, last sentence: "and RECOMMENDED" -> "and are RECOMMENDED" Done. Thanks again. Adrian, I have these editorials in the working copy committed. I can submit a new rev at your request. Thanks, -- Carlos.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
