MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <157495449637.5764.13855226736437311725@ietfa.amsl.com>
 <A8D2527F-67D2-4CB4-B967-13548D28DD56@akamai.com>
In-Reply-To: <A8D2527F-67D2-4CB4-B967-13548D28DD56@akamai.com>
From: Dan Romascanu <dromasca@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 22:31:37 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFgnS4XF8qHuXDCWtAYv7QMdn=RaDdgE2OPO3P+FkO3wPe+mag@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Holland, Jake" <jholland@akamai.com>
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>, 
 "draft-ietf-mboned-driad-amt-discovery.all@ietf.org"
 <draft-ietf-mboned-driad-amt-discovery.all@ietf.org>, 
 "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>, "mboned@ietf.org" <mboned@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ea70f90598d295b2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/8-4xFwIQnlCpFrJtkfHtEMW95IU>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [MBONED] Genart last call review of
 draft-ietf-mboned-driad-amt-discovery-09
Precedence: list

--000000000000ea70f90598d295b2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Jake,

Thanks for addressing these issues.

No further comments.

Regards,

Dan


On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 6:57 PM Holland, Jake <jholland@akamai.com> wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
> =EF=BB=BFOn 2019-11-28, 07:22, "Dan Romascanu via Datatracker" <noreply@i=
etf.org>
> wrote:
> > Nits/editorial comments:
> > 1. The reading of 2.4.1 and 2.4.3 seemed to me confusing. 2.4.1 speaks
> about
> > 'establishing' a connection while 2.4.3 speaks about 'completing' a
> connection.
> > Are the two terms equivalent? If so, I would prefer to use only one of
> them, if
> > not, some more clarification is necessary.
>
> Good point, thanks.  I've provisionally changed my local copy to use
> "established", which I think addresses this comment:
>
> OLD:
>    o  An AMT connection is completed successfully when the gateway
>       receives from a newly discovered relay a valid Membership Query
>
> NEW:
>    o  An AMT connection is established successfully when the gateway
>       receives from a newly discovered relay a valid Membership Query
>
> > 2. The term 'tier 3 ISP' used in Section 3.1.1 is an 'industry term'
> that needs
> > to be defined, either by reference or in text.
>
> I've removed the "Tier 3" and expanded the first use to "Internet Service
> Provider" (2nd use, not including section title).  I think the "Tier 3"
> was non-essential.
>
> OLD:
> 3.1.1.  Tier 3 ISP
>
>    One example of a receiving network is an ISP that offers multicast
>    ingest services to its subscribers, illustrated in Figure 3.
>
> NEW:
> 3.1.1.  Internet Service Provider
>
>    One example of a receiving network is an Internet Service Provider
>    (ISP) that offers multicast ingest services to its subscribers,
>    illustrated in Figure 3.
>
> Thanks for pointing out the nits, and please let me know if there's
> anything else you think needs changing.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Jake
>
>
>

--000000000000ea70f90598d295b2
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Hi Jake,</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for addressi=
ng these issues. <br></div><div><br></div><div>No further comments. <br></d=
iv><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Dan</div><div><br>=
</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_=
attr">On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 6:57 PM Holland, Jake &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:jh=
olland@akamai.com">jholland@akamai.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px sol=
id rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hi Dan,<br>
<br>
=EF=BB=BFOn 2019-11-28, 07:22, &quot;Dan Romascanu via Datatracker&quot; &l=
t;<a href=3D"mailto:noreply@ietf.org" target=3D"_blank">noreply@ietf.org</a=
>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; Nits/editorial comments:<br>
&gt; 1. The reading of 2.4.1 and 2.4.3 seemed to me confusing. 2.4.1 speaks=
 about<br>
&gt; &#39;establishing&#39; a connection while 2.4.3 speaks about &#39;comp=
leting&#39; a connection.<br>
&gt; Are the two terms equivalent? If so, I would prefer to use only one of=
 them, if<br>
&gt; not, some more clarification is necessary.<br>
<br>
Good point, thanks.=C2=A0 I&#39;ve provisionally changed my local copy to u=
se<br>
&quot;established&quot;, which I think addresses this comment:<br>
<br>
OLD:<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0o=C2=A0 An AMT connection is completed successfully when the g=
ateway<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 receives from a newly discovered relay a valid Members=
hip Query<br>
<br>
NEW:<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0o=C2=A0 An AMT connection is established successfully when the=
 gateway<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 receives from a newly discovered relay a valid Members=
hip Query<br>
<br>
&gt; 2. The term &#39;tier 3 ISP&#39; used in Section 3.1.1 is an &#39;indu=
stry term&#39; that needs<br>
&gt; to be defined, either by reference or in text.<br>
<br>
I&#39;ve removed the &quot;Tier 3&quot; and expanded the first use to &quot=
;Internet Service<br>
Provider&quot; (2nd use, not including section title).=C2=A0 I think the &q=
uot;Tier 3&quot;<br>
was non-essential.<br>
<br>
OLD:<br>
3.1.1.=C2=A0 Tier 3 ISP<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0One example of a receiving network is an ISP that offers multi=
cast<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0ingest services to its subscribers, illustrated in Figure 3.<b=
r>
<br>
NEW:<br>
3.1.1.=C2=A0 Internet Service Provider<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0One example of a receiving network is an Internet Service Prov=
ider<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0(ISP) that offers multicast ingest services to its subscribers=
,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0illustrated in Figure 3.<br>
<br>
Thanks for pointing out the nits, and please let me know if there&#39;s<br>
anything else you think needs changing.<br>
<br>
Thanks and regards,<br>
Jake<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div>

--000000000000ea70f90598d295b2--