Re: [ippm] AD review for draft-ietf-ippm-rt-loss-02

Al Morton <acmorton@att.com> Tue, 28 February 2012 03:25 UTC

Message-Id: <201202280325.q1S3P5Ko003816@alpd052.aldc.att.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:26:07 -0500
To: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>, "ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, ippm@ietf.org
From: Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F4BC840.4060003@mti-systems.com>
References: <4F4BC840.4060003@mti-systems.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: Re: [ippm] AD review for draft-ietf-ippm-rt-loss-02
Precedence: list

Yes, I used <Stream> in a previous memo,
but that term would be redundant with the
"Stream" in the metric name here.

I'll make the changes,
Al

At 01:15 PM 2/27/2012, Wesley Eddy wrote:
>Hi, I've done an AD review of the rt-loss document and think
>it's ready to go to IETF LC and IESG Review, except for one
>question that I have on what may be simply a typo:
>
>In Section 5, the last paragraph prior to 5.1 says:
>
>    In the metric name, the variable <Stream> SHALL be replaced with the
>    process used to define the sample, using one of the above processes
>    (or other process, the details of which MUST be specified if used).
>
>I believe, "<Stream>" should be "<Sample>"?  For instance,
>section 5.1 is Name: Type-P-Round-trip-Loss-<Sample>-Stream and
>section 6.1 is Type-P-Round-trip-Loss-<Sample>-Ratio.
>
>--
>Wes Eddy
>MTI Systems
>_______________________________________________
>ippm mailing list
>ippm@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm

[ippm] AD review for draft-ietf-ippm-rt-loss-02 Wesley Eddy
Re: [ippm] AD review for draft-ietf-ippm-rt-loss-… Al Morton