Re: [mpls] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-07: (with COMMENT)

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

Great; thanks, Chandra!

Barry

On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 12:40 AM Chandrasekar Ramachandran
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Barry,
> The comments from the genart review were on similar lines and hence this will be addressed in the next revision of the document.
>
> Thanks,
> Chandra.
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 5, 2019 9:07 AM
> > To: The IESG <[e-mail]>
> > Cc: [e-mail]; Nicolai Leymann
> > <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> > [e-mail]
> > Subject: Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-07: (with
> > COMMENT)
> >
> > Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-07: No Objection
> >
> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email
> > addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory
> > paragraph, however.)
> >
> >
> > Please refer to
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-
> > criteria.html__;!8WoA6RjC81c!Q7oqkA5dvZatD7KNGVCXg3JwdABbNaU6rbl
> > DHRPyNykUuTJFBosnLFveVo0lcmI$
> > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> >
> >
> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-
> > mpls-ri-rsvp-
> > frr/__;!8WoA6RjC81c!Q7oqkA5dvZatD7KNGVCXg3JwdABbNaU6rblDHRPyNy
> > kUuTJFBosnLFveul8Thf8$
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > There are numerous problems with the use and absence of articles (“the”,
> > “a”,
> > “an”) throughout the document: articles are missing when they should be
> > there,
> > “the” is used when an indefinite article should be, and so on.  That made it a
> > harder read than it should have been.  The RPC will fix it during editing, but
> > maybe the AD should add an RFC Editor Note to alert them to be particularly
> > watchful for these issues.
> >