[bmwg] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-virtual-net-04: (with COMMENT)

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bmwg-virtual-net-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-virtual-net/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a few mostly editorial comments:

- Abstract and Introduction: Missing "the" before "Benchmarking..."

-Abstract: Will the paragraph about new version history stay in the
RFC?

-1: Much of this section, especially the 2nd paragraph, reads like a
commercial, or a marketing white paper. I'm not going to put this in the
way of publication, but an IETF RFC should generally take a more neutral
tone. It's enough to acknowledge that people are doing (or plan to do)
NFV.

-2: Language of the form of "BMG will consider" will quickly become
dated. Consider something to the effect of "At the time of this writing,
BMG is considering/plans to consider..."

Can you offer a definition or citation for "bare metal"?

"Also,  benchmarking combinations of physical and virtual devices and
functions in a System Under Test.": Sentence fragment.

- 4.2, first paragraph, last sentence: Can you offer a citation for the
4x3 matrix?
: