Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-08

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 29 August 2016 20:00 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
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 2FE2D12D870; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:00:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 vg6PQ3LQ5_Uv; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x236.google.com (mail-pa0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::236]) (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 4FF2212D871; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-x236.google.com with SMTP id fi15so52540397pac.1; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=deJlRCZPVnvJldWgvFT6ZtlG74o+amt1Qmgeq/O8ydY=; b=ncLFX9eOc5wyNLRirrGcclwNKGh2GFwRU7m5GAa7HdklriyEu7FUpCWp87cJYXj9QO 9rSfb/1XA11Z+8JhomUxJfF7j9n3w8zNWeCLgEnaE4lvDrEFWcGzjPPkQakoamp25iID 4seg+8JFBfV5Us0c0fY1fPu/X+N5QnMsPzjDJnPRvqqB3b+KSX4WHnDaF/gJlK08ogZG y3Vfiu1iSU+AQ3FxOf+TDFBy8EFHKWrBBiBlfu+7zeMowOaD5G7UQKstCd3HnsbFXilN c2Gm2vssef4FcNMoMhHkKrAZKsgnqFoQiXAnokP1BU6tnzlL7Rd9T+FA3pVzETHBvCLQ Y+CQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=deJlRCZPVnvJldWgvFT6ZtlG74o+amt1Qmgeq/O8ydY=; b=DqKxgcAQZLyS2Ci2NBA7XEcIgfjsund6t4oqqC2YR4Hj1K3zErUKIbBO/MBmT06xXJ HHR3v5jPOb9rtQPYb3wlyVpvXdJH4XiNwLuPeqnDBcVlMbt3pHZxfblIy2bG3B675gGc QotGHpLlUyOgzoJ2yBjj3s7xls5Ajn66es6PA7fapRkCOxaG8F8FEpbueO6617gs2LQJ LMY2IdXiFDy5lF7oWgXNYeDbLGk18fxRFqk5gXucrBAUHCLVCY/1HfFkICIzsjWAyQD/ Yz8fIxMoyLkTki1EbY3GSwTwbRm/UIYPw4YJQYRHMX6yXaB8ZyPRHDXqFDT58ImC/+da NuSw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPO8GxZR3+LhFMQSf50lFsyvOKp0IGD+fCEqo/SADGn5U8w6LoyydozJOh5BLm/QQ==
X-Received: by 10.66.159.170 with SMTP id xd10mr36328078pab.41.1472500818570; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:449a:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:449a:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i137sm51183775pfe.64.2016.08.29.13.00.15 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:00:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de
References: <58ad636e-dfb7-3b17-d147-9271da1d3af9@gmail.com> <a617ef082f434be9a67baa554c2be92e@HE101653.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <b428cfa6-41c7-0560-a992-12de8c99e297@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 08:00:18 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a617ef082f434be9a67baa554c2be92e@HE101653.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/qst4fDAHE9Kqeya1NHmLlWCz0g0>
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon.all@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-08
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 20:00:21 -0000

Ruediger,

Thanks and regards,
   Brian

On 29/08/2016 19:19, Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
> thanks. I've submitted a new version without the nits (I applied "RFC nnnn" notation for non-reference mentions).
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ruediger
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon/
> 
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-09
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-09
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com] 
> Gesendet: Montag, 29. August 2016 06:47
> An: draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon.all@ietf.org; General Area Review Team
> Betreff: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-08
> 
> 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 <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-intercon-08.txt
> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
> Review Date: 2016-08-29
> IETF LC End Date: 2016-09-08
> IESG Telechat date:
> 
> Summary: Ready with nits
> --------
> 
> Comments:
> ---------
> 
> 1. I was co-chair of the original diffserv WG, and I have tracked this draft throughout its life and influenced some of its content. I have re-read it carefully for this review.
> 
> 2. I believe it is correctly positioned as Informational. It might become a candidate for BCP with deployment experience.
> 
> Nits:
> -----
> 
> Section 4 mentions RFC2575, certainly a typo for RFC2475.
> 
> Non-reference mentions of RFCs are inconsistent, e.g. both "RFC4594" and  "RFC 4594" occur.
>