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-teas-gmpls-lsp-fastreroute-09.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 20170706 IETF LC End Date: 20170707 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: - ToC page 3 and Acknowledgments page 21: Acknowledgements -> AcknowledgDements - 1 page 4: you should introduce the LSP abbrev too (BTW if GMPLS is a well known abbrev cf https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt LSP is not, IMHO because this abbrev has some other meanings in the IETF scope) - 4.5.1 page 9: The Node-ID address must match the source -> MUST or has to - 4.5.1 page 9: may -> can (RFC 2119 did not clearly specify that keywords are only in uppercase. Note only the previous item is really ambiguous). - 5.1 page 11 and 5.2.2 page 14: e.g. -> e.g., - 5.3 page 15 and 6 page 16: may -> can - 11.1 page 20 RFC3473: should be ReserVation -> ReSerVation but the bug is in the RFC 3473 title please don't fix... - Contributors page 21: * Orange CH is ambiguous: there are some cities named Orange, for instance a medium one in France. I suggest to put the CH on the next line * China -> PR China or CN (i.e., follow UPU or IETF specs) Thanks francis.dup...@fdupont.fr _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
