Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp-07
Linda Dunbar <Linda.dunbar@huawei.com> Mon, 04 December 2017 23:23 UTC
Return-Path: <Linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietf.org
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90EE4128D69; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 15:23:05 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Linda Dunbar <Linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, rtgwg@ietf.org
Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp-07
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.66.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <151242978555.13727.1858755965278027482@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 15:23:05 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/ItwWplBKRAE8YDI8Gaj89b0ErF8>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 23:23:06 -0000
Reviewer: Linda Dunbar Review result: Ready I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp-07 Reviewer: Linda Dunbar Review Date: 2017-12-04 IETF LC End Date: 2017-12-12 IESG Telechat date: 2018-01-11 Summary: Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: It would be helpful to add description on why you need both Tracking Interface and Tracking network. Both of them have the same description "to detect interface connectivity failures". What kind of "connectivity failures" will be reported over the "Tracking Interface"? what connectivity failures will be reported to "Tracking Network"? Thanks, Linda Dunbar
- Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-… Linda Dunbar