Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-ndata-12

[Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>]

Hi Michael

Sorry I misread the text.

The text is fine as it is, and I leave it to you to see if there is an 
improvement with a common definition.

I am correcting the review.

- Stewart


On 25/08/2017 11:53, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>> On 14. Aug 2017, at 22:02, Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
>> Review result: Ready
>>
> Hi Stewart,
>
> thanks for your review. See my comment in-line.
>
> Best regards
> Michael
>> 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-tsvwg-sctp-ndata-12
>> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
>> Review Date: 2017-08-14
>> IETF LC End Date: 2017-08-25
>> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>>
>> Summary: This is a well written draft and is ready for publication.
>>
>> Major issues: None
>>
>> Minor issues: None
>>
>> Nits/editorial comments:
>>
>> You repeat the text:
>>
>> "A message is considered in flight, if at least  on of its I-DATA chunks is not
>> acknowledged in a non-renegable way"  in two consecutive sections, maybe a
>> common definition could be used.
> The first text covers "Message in flight", the second covers "Fragment in flight".
> What is duplicated is the text (i.e. acknowledged by the cumulative TSN Ack) for
> explaining "acknowledged in a non-renegable way". Giving the explanation only once
> improves readability, I guess.
>
> Best regards
> Michael