Re: [babel] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-applicability-07: (with COMMENT)

[Juliusz Chroboczek <[e-mail]>]

Dear Alissa,

Thanks for your review.

> I find the use of "we" and "our" odd for a consensus document. I think the
> document would be improved if these used the document itself as the subject
> (e.g., "this document describes" instead of "we describe").

Agreed.  Fixed in -08.

> I think the claims made in the bulleted list at the end of Section 2.2 need
> citations.

I agree, but I won't do it.  Please let me explain.

The fact that Babel has the claimed properties has been proved, but
I haven't published the proof yet.  (The proof has been reviewed by
a competent specialist of the area, who concluded "that looks like a proof
to me".  Which, knowing the individual, I consider as high praise indeed.)

As for the fact that realistic networks have the required properties --
that's something that, to the best of my knowledge, hasn't been studied
much.  The best source IMHO is Griffin and Sobrinho (already cited as
[METAROUTING] in this draft), but it's mostly about properties of BGP
networks, and therefore doesn't directly apply to the kind of networks
considered in this document.

So there's not much I can do at this time.  If you know otherwise, please
let me know.

-- Juliusz