[Dots] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks-05: (with COMMENT)

Lars Eggert via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 30 September 2022 12:52 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Lars Eggert via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks@ietf.org, dots-chairs@ietf.org, dots@ietf.org, valery@smyslov.net, valery@smyslov.net
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-ID: <166454235578.58025.14950152707054460603@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 05:52:35 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/lm-foHTULHntCG5FwQfYmNFTf08>
Subject: [Dots] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks-05: (with COMMENT)

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks-05: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks/



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

# GEN AD review of draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks-05

CC @larseggert

Thanks to Tim Evens for the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/NJ_TPQmVJ7Ph620Xlka54ptz-f8).

## Comments

### IANA

The IANA review of this document seems to not have concluded yet.

## Nits

All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there
will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
did with these suggestions.

### Grammar/style

#### Section 3, paragraph 4
```
o limit the potential wait needed calculated when using PROBING_RATE. NON_PAR
                                  ^^^^^^^^^^
```
The double modal "needed calculated" is nonstandard (only accepted in certain
dialects). Consider "to be calculated".

#### Section 5, paragraph 11
```
 limit the potential wait needed calculated when using probing-rate."; choic
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^
```
The double modal "needed calculated" is nonstandard (only accepted in certain
dialects). Consider "to be calculated".

## Notes

This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
[`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT].

[ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
[ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
[IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool

[Dots] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-d… Lars Eggert via Datatracker
Re: [Dots] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ie… mohamed.boucadair