Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-10

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Wed, 14 July 2021 11:26 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 8134D3A0C5D; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 04:26:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 RXz5996kdFmP; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 04:26:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FD813A0C5C; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 04:26:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [85.131.57.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 092E660034E; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 14:26:21 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1626261982; bh=ojBBsv+Hf3MVmxcs0C4xsYI5o7A1tP6Nd4ITVbI9l3s=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=NhXiRZQX3x49Cved8R0LqmXwh2YecfV01wV/Q0ooP74rHU5reKQAyIB0kc9eykLEq aqzyXCZD+yE7sdlFObavP1SBvDYVqBFO5TX2wpgq+r19eWWuopxzHkBQNRPI+1qkZz RpZdV3PJ0BW7RwyZqrZPFwoObO+oXS9t7xpOdYxk=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <35868D5F-34CC-4144-A68A-232FB138AE7B@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3FE6DA93-8530-4910-8F5F-B2032213F633"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.100.0.2.22\))
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2021 14:26:21 +0300
In-Reply-To: <162619487072.21095.13102788339863024663@ietfa.amsl.com>
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, last-call@ietf.org, netmod@ietf.org, draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff.all@ietf.org
To: Matt Joras <matt.joras@gmail.com>
References: <162619487072.21095.13102788339863024663@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: 092E660034E.A2EEB
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/LcjjadnpmIdZ9ozQLFybZhvYI9o>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-netmod-nmda-diff-10
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: Wed, 14 Jul 2021 11:26:54 -0000

Matt, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document.

Lars


> On 2021-7-13, at 19:47, Matt Joras via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Matt Joras
> Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
> 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-netmod-nmda-diff-??
> Reviewer: Matt Joras
> Review Date: 2021-07-13
> IETF LC End Date: 2021-07-02
> IESG Telechat date: 2021-07-15
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> Consider rewording this sentence in performance considerations:
> 
> "One possibility for an implementation to mitigate against such a possibility
> is to limit the number of requests that is served to a client, or to any number
> of clients, in any one time interval, rejecting requests made at a higher
> frequency than the implementation can reasonably sustain."
> 
> It is excessively wordy and uses the word "possibility" twice. I would suggest
> breaking this into two separate sentences.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art