Re: [tcpm] Erik Kline's No Objection on draft-ietf-tcpm-rack-14: (with COMMENT)

[Yuchung Cheng <[e-mail]>]

Thank you for your review to improve the clarity. We'll revise accordingly
"keeps", "a timestamp whose granularity is finer", "takes a longer time".

On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 9:56 PM Erik Kline via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-tcpm-rack-14: 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://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-rack/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> [[ nits ]]
>
> [ section 3.1 ]
>
> * "Conceptually, RACK puts a virtual timer for"
>
>   Instead of "puts" perhaps "uses", "keeps", "imagines", or something?
>
> [ section 4 ]
>
> * "a timestamp whose granularity that is finer" ->
>   "a timestamp with a granularity that is finer",  or
>   "a timestamp whose granularity is finer", perhaps
>
> [ section 9.4 ]
>
> * "sender takes longer time" -> "sender takes a longer time"?
>
>
>
>