IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-vpls-interop-05

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Wed, 09 October 2013 21:30 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 7DC7821E81E2 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 14:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.416
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.416 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.117, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_LIST=2.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4xInKjBntk-A for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 14:30:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8680221E81DC for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2013 14:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E41C32CCAE; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 00:30:09 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Tu_K3VAJNBGx; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 00:30:09 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39C9B2CC48; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 00:30:09 +0300 (EEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <69670F7146898C4583F56DA9AD32F77B215BDA7B@xmb-aln-x13.cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 00:30:09 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C7A08F84-FA05-40CB-BCDF-C818B97B67F3@piuha.net>
References: <69670F7146898C4583F56DA9AD32F77B215BDA7B@xmb-aln-x13.cisco.com>
To: Ali Sajassi <sajassi@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-vpls-interop.all@tools.ietf.org, "gen-art@ietf.org (gen-art@ietf.org)" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-l2vpn-pbb-vpls-interop-05
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 21:30:37 -0000

Thank you Ali and Ben!

Jari

On Oct 9, 2013, at 1:13 AM, Ali Sajassi (sajassi) <sajassi@cisco.com> wrote:

> 
> Ben,
> 
> Thanks for your comments. I have incorporated all your comments in rev06
> of this draft.
> 
> 
> On 9/23/13 1:29 PM, "Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:
> 
>> 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-l2vpn-pbb-vpls-interop-05
>> Reviewer: Ben Campbell
>> Review Date: 2013-09-23
>> IETF LC End Date: 2013-09-24
>> 
>> Summary: Ready for publication as an informational RFC.
>> 
>> Major issues:
>> 
>> None
>> 
>> Minor issues:
>> 
>> None
>> 
>> Nits/editorial comments:
>> 
>> -- Abstract:
>> 
>> Please expand H-VPLS on first mention
> 
> Done.
> 
>> 
>> -- section 1, 1st paragraph:
>> 
>> Please expand VPLS on first mention.
> 
> Done.
> 
>> 
>> -- section 4, 3rd to last paragraph: "Different PBB access networks..."
>> 
>> The previous and subsequent paragraphs say "PBBN access networks". Should
>> this instance also say PBBN?
> 
> Done.
> 
>> 
>> -- section 4.3:
>> 
>> 2nd paragraph says this scenario is applicable to "Loosely Coupled
>> Service Domains" and "Different Service Domains". The 4th paragraph
>> mentions "Tightly...". Does that mean the scenario also applies to
>> "Tightly Coupled Service Domains"? (i.e. should it be added to the 2nd
>> paragraph, or removed from the 4th?)
>> 
> 
> Removed "Tightly Š" from the 4th paragraph.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ali
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email