On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 12:16:18PM +0000, Christer Holmberg 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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__wiki.tools.ietf.org_area_gen_trac_wiki_GenArtfaq&d=DwMFAg&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=4Z9x1ZAReZp_mJahI6h9bQ&m=iIo_51LYIireg4AnsuBoZIWVunRNL9x6ZXHqz5Q2CGc&s=peDTnfOaiDiT8_m4J-VWJr70Nt0m41lLVGq3yYls12k&e=>>
>
> Minor Issues:
>
> Q1: The Introduction talks about the growing usage of multicast, and the it
> begins the list what the document does. But, what is the background and need
> for the document? Is there a problem? Are there interoperability issues? At
> the end of the section it is said that ways to improve are identified, but it
> is unclear exactly what needs to be improved. I think it would be good to say
> a few words in the Introduction about the issues and problems.
I am a bit at a loss. This is a BCP, eg: it is meant to document current best
practices.
It is not meant to suggest "improvements" for protocols or the like. The
abstract and
intro do IMHO pretty well stsate the intent and purpose of the doc.
Maybe its just surprising to you that there has so far been no document to
describe how
to deploy IP multicast interdomain, especially with the inclusion of of options
such
as GRE and AMT - and simplifying it by only using SSM ??
Or else: Do you have any text to propose ?
> Editorial Issues:
>
>
>
> Q2: The title of section 4 is ?Supporting Functionality?. That seems a little
> strange in my eyes. Supporting functionality of what?
>
All the subsections are called "<function-foobar> Guidlines", so how about wee
call the whole section "Functional Guidelines" ?
Cheers
Toerless
---
t...@cs.fau.de
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
