Re: [Gen-art] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-08.txt> (Rate Measurement Test Protocol Problem Statement) to Informational RFC

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

This version addresses the concerns from my GEN-ART review. I agree that it's reasonable to skip the figure numbers with only two small figures.

Thanks!

Ben.

> On Jan 9, 2015, at 5:33 PM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Ben, Dan, Greg,
> 
> Version 09 of -ippm-rate-problem draft addresses your comments
> to great extent.
> 
> Although Ben's (GEN-ART) suggestion to clarify the figure in the Intro was
> adopted, it seems reasonable to leave out the Figure numbers 
> since the two figures are referenced one time each and they are
> only 3 lines high (so not likely to move far, if at all).
> 
> Dan's (OPS-DIR) comments have been addressed (following e-mail
> exchange) by inserting a new section on Operational Considerations
> where we have compromised on the text.
> 
> Greg's comments have been addressed to the extent possible without
> re-visiting the "Toronto compromise" which only involved section 5.
> Other comments cite WG agreements that have not actually been 
> discussed AFAIK, or refer to purely OPTIONAL features in the memo.
> 
> regards,
> Al
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: IETF-Announce [[e-mail]] On Behalf Of The IESG [[e-mail]]
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 9:43 AM
> To: IETF-Announce
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-08.txt> (Rate Measurement Test Protocol Problem Statement) to Informational RFC
> 
> The IESG has received a request from the IP Performance Metrics WG (ippm)
> to consider the following document:
> - 'Rate Measurement Test Protocol Problem Statement'
>  <draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem-08.txt> as Informational RFC
> 
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> [e-mail] mailing lists by 2014-12-22. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to [e-mail] instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> 
> Abstract
> 
> 
>   This memo presents an access rate-measurement problem statement for
>   test protocols to measure IP Performance Metrics.  The rate
>   measurement scenario has wide-spread attention of Internet access
>   subscribers and seemingly all industry players, including regulators.
>   Key test protocol aspects require the ability to control packet size
>   on the tested path and enable asymmetrical packet size testing in a
>   controller-responder architecture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The file can be obtained via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem/
> 
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-rate-problem/ballot/
> 
> 
> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> 
>