Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1])
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B53B01A02B9;
 Tue,  5 Aug 2014 12:58:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 lxo09YOQlIvx; Tue,  5 Aug 2014 12:58:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 501861A028B;
 Tue,  5 Aug 2014 12:58:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unnumerable.local (pool-173-57-89-168.dllstx.fios.verizon.net
 [173.57.89.168]) (authenticated bits=0)
 by nostrum.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s75Jwpvl096793
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK);
 Tue, 5 Aug 2014 14:58:51 -0500 (CDT)
 (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host
 pool-173-57-89-168.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [173.57.89.168] claimed to be
 unnumerable.local
Message-ID: <53E1377A.5010906@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 14:58:50 -0500
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, conex@ietf.org,
 "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>,
 draft-ietf-conex-abstract-mech.all@tools.ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/CaicDBTPWlSuB4iCJFZ7wK3NZvY
Subject: [Gen-art] Genart LC review: draft-ietf-conex-abstract-mech-12
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 19:58:53 -0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-conex-abstract-mech-12
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date: 5-Aug-2014
IETF LC End Date: 8-Aug-2014
IESG Telechat date: Not on an upcoming telechat agenda

Summary: Ready for publication as Informational

This document handles a complex description problem in a very accessible 
way.
Thank you for the effort that has gone into creating it.

One minor point to double-check:

This document goes out of its way to push decisions about measuring in 
packets,
bytes, or other units to the concrete  encoding proposals. RFC6789 was 
explicit
about conex exposing a metric of congestion-volume measured in bytes.

RFC6789 was published a couple of years ago - has that part of it become 
stale?
If so, it would be good for this document to explicitly call that out.

If not, (most of section 4.6 goes back to -04 which predates RFC6789),
does this document need to retain the this flexibility in its description?