Re: [Gen-art] (full) review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-datagram-plpmtud-15.txt

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Thu, 12 March 2020 17:20 UTC

Return-Path: <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 848D53A0DE8; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WlZpPVyy1N2f; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:42:150::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B37A43A0DED; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 10:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from GF-MacBook-Pro.local (fgrpf.plus.com [212.159.18.54]) by pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE21A1B0007C; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 17:20:11 +0000 (GMT)
To: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>, gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-tsvwg-datagram-plpmtud.all@ietf.org
References: <202003121620.02CGKIbE088427@givry.fdupont.fr>
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <20dc9a9c-9eca-23d8-ce59-8901ebb6b456@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 17:20:11 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <202003121620.02CGKIbE088427@givry.fdupont.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/2WcRseR0tbbiiwDoH4aSsvGeWtw>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] (full) review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-datagram-plpmtud-15.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 17:20:20 -0000

Thanks for your review! We will act on this and another detailed review 
of NiTs, and expect to make a new revision in a few days.

Sorry for adding to your pain - being careful to work as an early pilot 
for the new document format has probably left us continuing with more 
NiTs than we should have, and we'll resolve these.

Gorry

On 12/03/2020 16:20, Francis Dupont wrote:
> 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-tsvwg-datagram-plpmtud-15.txt
> Reviewer: Francis Dupont
> Review Date: 20200311
> IETF LC End Date: 20200310
> IESG Telechat date: unknown
>
> Summary: Ready
>
> Major issues: None
>
> Minor issues: None
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>   - ToC page 3 and 7 page 35: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments
>    (note the word has inconsistent spelling (i.e. US and UK) in
>     the document, I put here the UK spelling, preferring the US one).
>
>   - 4.3 page 15, 5.3.1 page 27, 6.1.1 page 30, 6.3 page 34:
>     acknowledgement -> acknowledgment
>
>   - 4.6.2 pages 18 and 19: (e.  g.  -> (e.g.,
>
>   - 5.1.4 page 24 "Error": e.g. -> e.g.,
>
>   - 6.2.3 page 33: [RFC8261] . -> [RFC8261].
>
>   - 10.1 page 36: I suggest to move the I-D normative reference to the
>    end of the list, expecting it will get a greater RFC number...
>
> I suggest to run a spell checker with the wanted English variant to track
> words from the other one.
>
> Note these comments are about very small editorial points so you can
> (should?) consider to leave them to the RFC Editor.
>
> Regards
>
> Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr
>
> PS: I looked at the version 16: I have no new comment other the wording
> about the anti-pattern could be improved.