Thanks for your review, Christer! Authors, can you make a note of the editorials?
Jari On 01 Feb 2017, at 21:57, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmb...@ericsson.com> wrote: > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review > Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the > IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call > comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: > draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04.txt > Reviewer: Christer Holmberg > Review Date: 01.02.2017 > IETF LC End Date: 19.01.2017 > IESG Telechat date: (if known) 02.02.2017 > > Summary: The document is almost ready > for publication, but there are some editorial nits that I’d like the authors > to address. > > Major issues: None > > Minor issues: None > > Nits/editorial comments: > > INTRODUCTION: > > Q1: In the first sentence of the Introduction, I suggest to say: > > “The failover protocol defined in this document provides…” > > Otherwise it’s a little unclear what failover protocol you are talking about. > > Q2: In the Introduction, before the first sentence, shouldn’t there be > some background text, including some information about the problem that the > document solves. I know there is something in the Abstract, but I think there > should also be something in the Introduction, before jumping into the > solution. > > Q3: In the Introduction, I suggest adding a reference to the first > occurrences of “DHCP service” and “DHCP server”. > > Q4: In the Introduction, you switch between “This protocol” and “The > failover protocol”. Please use consistent terminology. This applies to the > document in general. > > SECTION 4: > > Q5: In the Abstract and Introduction it is said that DHCPv6 does not > provide server redundancy. Then section 4 talks about failover concepts and > mechanism. > > Are those concepts something used for DHCPv6 today, but for some reason do > not fulfil the failover protocol requirements? > > OR, are these general concepts that will be supported by implementing the > failover protocol? > > I think it would be good to have an introduction statement clarifying that. > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
