Re: [nwcrg] IRTF Chair review of draft-irtf-nwcrg-tetrys-02

[Colin Perkins <[e-mail]>]

Dear Jonathan,

Thank you, these changes address my concerns.
Colin



On 6 Sep 2022, at 20:18, Jonathan Detchart wrote:

> Dear Colin,
>
> Thank you very much for your feedback. We modified the document as you 
> suggested :
>
> "Please review the use of normative MAY; most instances of this are 
> not describing normative requirements and would be better phrased as 
> “can” or “may”. Consider citing RFC 8174 in preference to RFC 
> 2119."
> /We reviewed the use of normative MAY and RFC 8174 is now cited/
> //
> "Section 5.3.1, paragraph starting “For example, the Coded Symbol 3 
> is a linear combination” and the following bullet list prior to 
> Section 5.3.1.1 are not clearly written. In particular, it’s not 
> clear if the bullet points relate to the example or are more general 
> design rationale."
> "Section 5.3.1.1 would benefit from an introductory sentence to set 
> the context."
> /- We reworked the section 5.3.1. We defined more precisely the use of 
> different ways to store the source symbols information into the 
> encoding vectors/
> /- We also clarified the example of the coded symbol generation/
> //
> "Section 6.3 talks about the “IRTF LOOPS working group” but there 
> is no such group. This is presumably referring to the IETF BoF."
> /we removed the reference of the IRTF LOOPS group./
>
> All the modifications are now included in a new version: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-nwcrg-tetrys/03/
>
> Also, we confirm that we made all necessary IPR disclosures for this 
> work and we are not reasonably aware of IPR that would apply from 
> third parties
>
> Regards,
>
> Jonathan DETCHART
>
> Le 8/19/2022 à 7:44 PM, Colin Perkins a écrit :
>>
>> The NWCRG chairs have requested that draft-irtf-nwcrg-tetrys-02 be 
>> published as an RFC on the IRTF stream. The IRTF publication process 
>> is described in RFC 5743, and comprises a review by the IRSG to 
>> ensure technical and editorial quality, followed by a check by the 
>> IESG to ensure the work does not conflict with IETF standards 
>> activities.
>>
>> As IRTF Chair, I perform an initial review of all drafts submitted 
>> for publication on the IRTF stream before sending them for detailed 
>> review by the IRSG. This note provides my review comments, for 
>> discussion.
>>
>> Authors, please can you also respond to this message to confirm that 
>> all necessary IPR disclosures, as described on 
>> https://irtf.org/policies/ipr, have been made?
>>
>> Result: Ready with nits
>>
>> RFC 5743 compliance: The draft follows the guidelines in RFC 5743
>>
>> Comments:
>>
>>   * Please review the use of normative MAY; most instances of this 
>> are
>>     not describing normative requirements and would be better phrased
>>     as “can” or “may”. Consider citing RFC 8174 in preference 
>> to RFC 2119.
>>   * Section 5.3.1, paragraph starting “For example, the Coded 
>> Symbol 3
>>     is a linear combination” and the following bullet list prior to
>>     Section 5.3.1.1 are not clearly written. In particular, it’s 
>> not
>>     clear if the bullet points relate to the example or are more
>>     general design rationale.
>>   * Section 5.3.1.1 would benefit from an introductory sentence to 
>> set
>>     the context.
>>   * Section 6.3 talks about the “IRTF LOOPS working group” but 
>> there
>>     is no such group. This is presumably referring to the IETF BoF.
>>
>> Colin Perkins
>> IRTF Chair
>>
>> --
>> Colin Perkins
>> https://csperkins.org/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nwcrg mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/nwcrg