Re: [nfsv4] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-09

[David Noveck <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for the review.

> * For the bullet points in this document, some end in periods and
> some don't.  I recommend the authors choose one and update
> accordingly.

Will update those without periods.

> * In section 1. "Introduction", the last sentence is very clumsy.
> The Gen-ART review already points this out, and provides what I think
> is a good suggested change.

It has been updated.

> * In section 4.4.2 "Establishing Interoperability", the phrase
> "client
> would uses" should be "client uses"

Will fix.

> * In section 5.2 "Behavioral Changes", the following sentence is
> difficult parse:

...

> I think the following has the same meaning:
>
>   """
>   One class of behavior change involves changes in the set of errors
>   to be returned when various failure conditions occur.
>   """
>
> That's not tremendously better, but I think it's a little easier to
> wrap one's mind around.

Will change.

> * In the title for Section 9.3 "XDR Corrections to REQUIRED
> features",
> "Features" should be capitalized.

Will fix.

> * In Section 9.3 "XDR Corrections to REQUIRED features", the word
> "correct" should be "corrected" in the sentence "Such clients would
> only
> be capable of interoperating with servers that supported the correct
> version."

Will fix.


On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Matthew Miller <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Reviewer: Matthew Miller
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> Document: draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-09
> IETF LC End Date: 2017-05-12
> IESG Telechat date: 2017-05-25
>
> This document provides guidance for dealing with extensions
> and versioning in NFSv4, including how and when to update
> minor versions.
>
> This document is mostly ready.  Some of the grammatical choices
> make for a more difficult read; the most obvious ones to me are
> nits below.
>
> Major issues:
>
> NONE
>
> Minor issues:
>
> NONE
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> * For the bullet points in this document, some end in periods and
> some don't.  I recommend the authors choose one and update
> accordingly.
>
> * In section 1. "Introduction", the last sentence is very clumsy.
> The Gen-ART review already points this out, and provides what I think
> is a good suggested change.
>
> * In section 4.4.2 "Establishing Interoperability", the phrase
> "client
> would uses" should be "client uses"
>
> * In section 5.2 "Behavioral Changes", the following sentence is
> difficult parse:
>
>    """
>    One class of behavioral change involves changes in the set of
> errors
>    to be returned in the event of various errors.
>    """
>
> I think the following has the same meaning:
>
>    """
>    One class of behavior change involves changes in the set of errors
>    to be returned when various failure conditions occur.
>    """
>
> That's not tremendously better, but I think it's a little easier to
> wrap one's mind around.
>
> * In the title for Section 9.3 "XDR Corrections to REQUIRED
> features",
> "Features" should be capitalized.
>
> * In Section 9.3 "XDR Corrections to REQUIRED features", the word
> "correct" should be "corrected" in the sentence "Such clients would
> only
> be capable of interoperating with servers that supported the correct
> version."
>
>
>