Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC review: draft-ietf-pals-redundancy-spe-02

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

Robert, Jimmy,

Thanks for the review & discussion.

From my perspective some of the things that Robert raises are very valid
questions. The particular item that I’m perhaps most interested in is the
text in Section 3.2, which seems like explaining what happens in an example,
but it also uses normative language and keywords to say what various entities
should do. Yet, the example is just one example. Is there a need to lift the
keyword statements out of this paragraph and generalise them to make
sure that the specification is about the general case and not about the
example? Alternatively, maybe I misunderstood the purpose of the keyword
statements.

(I also agree with Robert that the document is fairly hard to read. This isn’t
the first document in the IETF to be like that, and I didn’t feel that this
issue is discuss-worthy.)

Jari