[Tmrg-interest] [IRSG] IRSG Review: draft-irtf-tmrg-metrics-09
sallyfloyd at mac.com (Sally Floyd) Sat, 23 June 2007 05:24 UTC
From: "sallyfloyd at mac.com"
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 22:24:33 -0700
Subject: [Tmrg-interest] [IRSG] IRSG Review: draft-irtf-tmrg-metrics-09
In-Reply-To: <C1767A23-1F64-4642-B802-A7CA2275BBDF@cisco.com>
References: <C1767A23-1F64-4642-B802-A7CA2275BBDF@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <72efd43c2ac0b04b25fa58e51a4d5ee8@mac.com>
Tony - Many thanks for the review for the IRSG. > This is a review of draft-irtf-tmrg-metrics-09, in accordance with > draft-irtf-rfcs-01, section 5.2.2. This review raises two issues > (see [Issue x] below) that should be resolved prior to proceeding > with publication. ... > * There must be a paragraph near the beginning (for example, in > the introduction) describing the level of support for publication. > Example text might read: "this document represents the consensus of > the FOOBAR RG" or "the views in this document were considered > controversial by the FOOBAR RG but the RG reached a consensus that > the document should still be published". > > [Issue 1] Present in the abstract. This text should be replicated > into the body of the document. Replacing the last paragraph of the > introduction with a copy of the last paragraph from the abstract > should suffice. Thanks, I will do that. > * There should be citations and references to relevant research > publications. > > The references fill 4.5 pages and are frequently cited throughout > the text. Not being a subject matter expert, I am not prepared to > judge their relevancy. [Issue 2] It should be noted that as of the > time of this review, several of the references are now outdated. > These can easily be found through the idnits tool. These should be > updated before publication. I will make sure that the references are updates. - Sally http://www.icir.org/floyd/