Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-forces-packet-parallelization-02.txt

"Haleplidis Evangelos" <ehalep@ece.upatras.gr> Thu, 02 October 2014 16:52 UTC

Return-Path: <ehalep@ece.upatras.gr>
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 922C81A88F5 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Oct 2014 09:52:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.487
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.487 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786] 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 HLzyFRx53ONX for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Oct 2014 09:52:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgate.ece.upatras.gr (mailgate1.ece.upatras.gr [150.140.189.22]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E67801A8796 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Oct 2014 09:52:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EhalepXPS (150.140.254.250) by mailgate1 (Axigen) with ESMTPA id 03E77E; Thu, 2 Oct 2014 19:57:50 +0300
From: Haleplidis Evangelos <ehalep@ece.upatras.gr>
To: Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr, gen-art@ietf.org
References: <201410011334.s91DYrmZ047999@givry.fdupont.fr>
In-Reply-To: <201410011334.s91DYrmZ047999@givry.fdupont.fr>
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 19:52:20 +0300
Message-ID: <012d01cfde61$3bb93060$b32b9120$@upatras.gr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Ac/dfWwF4N1wgr8KTrmDtQB6lbkacgANQeMw
Content-Language: el
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/W-aRpwIXZ2WBBCcOn8-qwqum0iU
Cc: draft-ietf-forces-packet-parallelization.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-forces-packet-parallelization-02.txt
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: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 16:52:25 -0000

Greetings Francis,

Thank you for your review.
We have addressed all your comments. 

For further discussion please see inline. For brevity I kept only the items
for discussion. 

Regards,
Evangelos.

> Nits/editorial comments:
>  - Abstract page 1: the FE abbrev should be introduced (in particular
>   one can believe it means ForCES Element in place of Forwarding
> Element)
> 

[ΕΗ] As Joel said, FE is Forwarding Element. We expanded it.

>  - 1 page 3: the ForCES abbrev must be introduced again (the Abstract
>   is not a part of the document for this)
>
>  - 1 page 3: same for LFB

[ΕΗ] For the first (ForCES) we expanded the acronym, but the LFB is
introduced in the first paragraph. Did you mean something else?

>  - 1 page 3: bad wording:
>   "Being an experimental document the LFB Class IDs cannot be
> included..."
> 

[ΕΗ] Changed the wording from:
"Being an experimental document the LFB Class IDs cannot be included in the
standard action's value and therefore must have a value of larger than 65535
and must begin with prefix 'Ext-'.  However when we refer to the LFB Class
names in the text of this document (not the formal definitions), we will
omit the 'Ext-' prefix."
To:	
"This document is in the experimental track and thus the LFB Class IDs will
not be included in the standard action's values. Therefore the LFB Class IDs
must have a value larger than 65535 and the LFB names must begin with the
prefix 'Ext-'. However for brevity, when we refer to the LFB Class names in
the text of this document (not the formal definitions), the 'Ext-' prefix
will be omitted."

>  - 4.2.2 page 14: what is the MergeWaitTimeoutTimer unit?
>   (if the answer is not trivial it should be added in the document)
> 

[EH] Thank you for catching this. The text now explicitly specifies the
MergeWaitTimeoutTimer unit in milliseconds. Additionally, we added a small
sentence that explicitly specifies when the timer starts counting for each
parallel task: "The MergeWaitTimeoutTimer starts as soon as the first chunk
or packet of a parallel task arrives."
	
>  - 8 page 25: parallezation -> parallelization

[ΕΗ] Thanks for that. We have addressed that as our response to the security
review by Magnus.