Re: [Last-Call] RtgDir Last Call review: draft-ietf-raw-use-cases-05

[CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <[e-mail]>]

Dear Victoria,

Thanks a lot for your review and comments. Please see inline below.

On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 7:25 PM Victoria Pritchard <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft.
> The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related
> drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes
> on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to
> the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing Directorate, please
> see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
>
> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it
> would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last
> Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through
> discussion or by updating the draft.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-raw-use-cases-05
> Reviewer: Victoria Pritchard
> Review Date: 01/09/2022
> Intended Status: Informational
>
> Summary:
>
>     This document is basically ready for publication but has nits that
> should be considered prior to publication.
>
> Comments:
>
>     This is an interesting and informative draft, clearly identifying use
> cases and the reliability, availability and latency characteristics which
> are important to them.
>
> Major Issues:
>
>     No major issues found.
>
> Minor Issues:
>
>     No minor issues found.
>
> Nits:
>
> Introduction
> - "by leveraging on lower (L2 and below) capabilities" -> "by leveraging
> lower layer (Layer 2 and below) capabilities"?
>

[Carlos] OK, thanks, changed!


> - " (RAW) is an effort to provide Deterministic
>    Networking Mechanisms on across a multi-hop path that includes a" -
> dont need both 'on' and 'across'
>

[Carlos] OK, thanks, fixed!


>
> No terminology / acronyms / abbreviations section - most are actually
> expanded inside the draft or are very well known but a few I did not
> understand, e.g.:
> - APT/TMA TMA/ENR ENR/ORP in figure 1
> - FRE in section 6.4
>
> [Carlos] Thanks, we have clarified/expanded these terms. We might add a
terminology section as well.



> Figure 1
> - transceiver appears twice at the bottom left - is one instance meant to
> be for LDACS GS on the right hand side of the figure?
>

[Carlos] I think it is meant to be for the "Airport based", but I'll check
with the LDACS experts.


>
> 2
> - "while during
>    en-route" --> "during flight" / "while en-route" - don't need both.
>

[Carlos] Thanks, fixed!


> 2.5.1
> - "what it is important is to keep " - "what is important is to keep"
>

[Carlos] Thanks, fixed!


>
> 3.1, 4.1, 5.1, etc. the sub-heading title
> - capital letters needed for "use-case". Should section 2.1 also be
> "Use-Case Description"?
>

[Carlos] Thanks, fixed! Not sure if the capitalization is correct (this
would be fixed by the RFC Editor anyway). I've used "Use-Case" for the time
being, as I agree it's important to be consistent in the titles and
headings.


>
> 4.4
> - teh -> the
>

[Carlos] Thanks, fixed!


>
> 5.1
> - Blue-Ray -> Blu-ray
>

[Carlos] Thanks, fixed!


>
> 6.4
> -  "Note thought," -> "Note though,"
>

[Carlos] Thanks, fixed!


> - "Dual/multiple link" - the sentence after this is hard to read, does it
> mean "due to the competitions, interference is common"? Or "due to the fact
> that competitions and interference are common"?
>

[Carlos] The second one, thanks, fixed!


>
> 7.1 "other time of vehicles" -> "other types of vehicles"?
>

[Carlos] Thanks, fixed!


>
> 8.1 "the use of multiples robots" -> "the use of multiple robots"
>

[Carlos] Thanks, fixed!


>
> 10 - "Future revisions of this document will include
>    specific text devoted to highlight this non-latency critical
>    requirements."
> This seems to have already been added as a sub-section for all use cases.
>

[Carlos] True, thanks!

All changes are incorporated in the pre -06 version. We will post a new
version once we get all the comments from the directorates and IESG review.

Thanks a lot!

Carlos