[RTG-DIR] 答复: [CCAMP] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-09

Julien,

Thanks for the review, we will update the draft according to your comments. 

One comment needs your clarification:
- s/functions defined in that document/functions specified in that very document/  [repetition of "defined"]
For adding "very", is it a typo?

For the reference [LMP-TEST], we will check with the authors of draft-cecczhang-ccamp-gmpls-g709v3-lmp, to see what's their intention.

Thank you again!

Dan

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Julien Meuric
发送时间: 2013年1月19日 1:00
收件人: rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org
抄送: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation.all@tools.ietf.org; rtg-dir@ietf.org; ccamp@ietf.org
主题: [CCAMP] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-09

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. The purpose 
of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more 
information about the Routing Directorate, please see 
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/routing.html

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-ccamp-lmp-behavior-negotiation-09
Reviewer: Julien Meuric
Review Date: 18 January 2013
IETF LC End Date: 21 January 2013
Intended Status: Standards Track

*Summary:*
This document is basically ready for publication, but has nits that 
should be considered prior to it.

*Comments:*
This document is clearly written and easy to understand. The defined 
mechanism is simple and well specified.

*Nits:*
Abstract
-Instead of "GMPLS networks", "GMPLS-controlled networks" reads more 
accurate to me. It would also align on the phrase used in the 
introduction. The resulting "Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching 
(GMPLS)-controlled networks" may be checked with the RFC Editor.

Introduction
- s/LMP node/LMP-capable node/
- s/functions defined in that document/functions specified in that very 
document/  [repetition of "defined"]
- s/the message types from/the types from/  [repetition of "message"]

Section 2.2
- s/MAY include, HelloConfig/MAY include HelloConfig/

Section 3.1
- s/number of MBZ bits field/number of bits in MBZ field/

Section 4
- s/[RFC4202] defined/[RFC4202]-defined/

Section 9.2
- I tend to think that [LMP TEST] should now reference 
draft-cecczhang-ccamp-gmpls-g709v3-lmp

Enjoy the week-end,

Julien

_______________________________________________
CCAMP mailing list
CCAMP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp