Philip,
These suggested changes look fine, and I like Michael Menth's
idea of rephrasing the text to discuss "reference rates of the
meters and markers" instead of "PCN-excess-rate".
Thanks,
--David
> -Original Message-
> From: gen-art-boun...@ietf.org
> [mailto:gen-art-boun...@ietf.o
Hi Phil, hi David,
philip.eard...@bt.com schrieb:
{ "PCN-excess-rate" strikes me as a bad name for a configured
{ throughput rate - I suggest choosing another term.
To be honest, I think it's too late to change it, as it's defined/used
in the PCN architecture doc, which has just become RFC555
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html ).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-ancp
David,
Thanks for your review & comments.
{ The implementation notes are very useful - the WG should be
{ commended for working through the practical implementation
{ considerations for this functionality up front as opposed to
{ leaving them to implementers to puzzle out.
Thanks!
{ "PCN-excess-r
