[Mobopts] Draft-irtf-mobopts-l2-abstractions

Rajeev Koodli <rajeev.koodli@nokia.com> Thu, 06 September 2007 17:20 UTC

Return-path: <mobopts-bounces@irtf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITL1r-0004Om-TP; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 13:20:31 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITL1q-0004OR-8A for mobopts@irtf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 13:20:30 -0400
Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.170] helo=mgw-ext11.nokia.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ITL1o-0005Iy-No for mobopts@irtf.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 13:20:30 -0400
Received: from esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh108.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.145]) by mgw-ext11.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l86HD2Pt028138; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:13:28 +0300
Received: from daebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.111]) by esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 20:13:21 +0300
Received: from daebe103.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.24]) by daebh101.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 12:13:07 -0500
Received: from 10.241.32.16 ([10.241.32.16]) by daebe103.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.24]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 17:13:07 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.4.060510
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 10:13:10 -0700
From: Rajeev Koodli <rajeev.koodli@nokia.com>
To: ext John L <johnl@iecc.com>
Message-ID: <C3058336.160F5%rajeev.koodli@nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: Draft-irtf-mobopts-l2-abstractions
Thread-Index: AcfQiawc6nxDKjx8EdyNZwAWy5YJpwgH4bx6
In-Reply-To: <C2CF9E6C.1483F%rajeev.koodli@nokia.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2007 17:13:07.0968 (UTC) FILETIME=[31D74800:01C7F0A9]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 52f7a77164458f8c7b36b66787c853da
Cc: irsg@isi.edu, ext Fumio Teraoka <tera@ics.keio.ac.jp>, "mobopts@irtf.org" <mobopts@irtf.org>
Subject: [Mobopts] Draft-irtf-mobopts-l2-abstractions
X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobility Optimizations <mobopts.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts>, <mailto:mobopts-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:mobopts@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mobopts-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts>, <mailto:mobopts-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: mobopts-bounces@irtf.org


Hi John,

I believe the authors have addressed your review comments.
Could you kindly take a look at the following revised version and let us
know if we could move forward with publishing this ID?

http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-irtf-mobopts-l2-abstractions-04.txt

Thank you.


-Rajeev

> 
> ------ Forwarded Message
> From: ext John L <johnl@iecc.com>
> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:00:06 -0400 (EDT)
> To: Rajeev Koodli <rajeev.koodli@nokia.com>
> Cc: Aaron Falk <falk@bbn.com>
> Subject: Mobopts review
> 
> I've read through draft-irtf-mobopts-l2-abstractions-03, and I find it
> almost but not quite ready for publication.
> 
> Keeping in mind that I am not particularly expert in mobile computing,
> the content seems fine.  It needs a careful copy-edit to fix some
> language problems that are distracting and occasionally ambiguous.  For
> example, page 6 defines PoA as "the attachment point of a mobile node".
> PoA presumably stands for Point of Attachment, and it just seems odd to
> have the abbreviation and definition not match.  More seriously, there are
> places where the complexity of English syntax leads to confusion.  For
> example, on page 3 the last sentence of the first paragraph reads "a
> layer can evenly communicate with each other", which I think is trying to
> say that the communication between layers is symmetrical, but I'm not
> sure.  A careful copy edit, in consultation with the authors to be sure
> the ambiguities are resolved correctly, should solve this.
> 
> Appendix B appears to contain two paper examples and one report of an
> experiment.  They're all fine, but it would be helpful to explain either
> why they tested the third example or why they didn't test the first two.
> 
> None of these problems are major, and I expect all could be fixed in one
> more editing pass.
> 
> Regards,
> John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for
> Dummies",
> Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
> "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.
> 
> ------ End of Forwarded Message
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mobopts mailing list
> Mobopts@irtf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts

-- 
http://people.nokia.net/~rajeev




_______________________________________________
Mobopts mailing list
Mobopts@irtf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts