RE: Request for WG adoption of for draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync

Dear RTGWG, I am a co-author, and I support the draft. I am not aware of any relevant IPR. Chris -Original Message- From: Jeff Tantsura [mailto:jefftant.i...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 4, 2017 2:46 PM To: RTGWG Cc: 'rtgwg-chairs' ;

RE: shepherd feedback and idnits on draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay-05.txt

Thanks Chris, I will post a new revision with those changes. From: Chris Bowers [mailto:cbow...@juniper.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 16:05 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS Cc: RTGWG; draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-de...@tools.ietf.org Subject: RE: shepherd feedback and idnits on

RE: shepherd feedback and idnits on draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay-05.txt

Stephane, See responses inline with [CB]. Chris From: stephane.litkow...@orange.com [mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 8:25 AM To: Chris Bowers Cc: RTGWG ; draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-de...@tools.ietf.org Subject: RE: shepherd

RE: shepherd feedback and idnits on draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay-05.txt

Hi Chris, Thanks for the review. I'm updating the document to reflect your proposals. Couple of comments: - s/"otherwise the standard IP convergence MUST be used."/ "otherwise the standard IP convergence MUST used". It does not sound good to me but may be because of an English grammar