Re: [trill] Shepherd's review Review of draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis-02.txt

"Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com> Wed, 10 August 2016 19:31 UTC

Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.com>
X-Original-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0691B12D616; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 12:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.739
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.739 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PK8zfXrplkIN; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 12:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (unknown [50.245.122.97]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC64712D642; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 12:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=forwardok (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=174.124.176.10;
From: "Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com>
To: <trill@ietf.org>
References: <0a6801d1f33b$dc589d30$9509d790$@ndzh.com>
In-Reply-To: <0a6801d1f33b$dc589d30$9509d790$@ndzh.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 15:30:24 -0400
Message-ID: <0a7e01d1f33d$a4874c60$ed95e520$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0A7F_01D1F31C.1D7648A0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQFgYLavMros8ZZ+vZhG7QJG+gULKqEluZLg
Content-Language: en-us
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/u1wOblYn41dfM22yT6WeKl11viM>
Cc: 'Donald Eastlake' <d3e3e3@gmail.com>, draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis@ietf.org, 'Jon Hudson' <jon.hudson@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [trill] Shepherd's review Review of draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis-02.txt
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <trill.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/trill/>
List-Post: <mailto:trill@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 19:31:15 -0000

Trill WG: 

 

I missed one other editorial change for RFC6439bis-02.txt. 

 

RFC7180 has been obsoleted by RFC7780.  This needs to be changed.

 

Sue 

 

From: trill [mailto:trill-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 3:18 PM
To: trill@ietf.org
Cc: 'Donald Eastlake'; draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis@ietf.org; 'Jon Hudson'
Subject: [trill] Shepherd's review Review of
draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis-02.txt

 

Status: Ready to publish 

Concerns: None 

 

Editorial nits: 

 

Section 2.2.1 - paragraph 6 sentence starting with /should the VLANs - it
would help if the sentence was broken into to sentences. 

Section 4.0 - 4th paragraph - in the 1st numbered sub-paragraph - the
sentence starting with /This is backward/

 

Is "backward compatible" correct English.  My understanding is that it would
"backwardly compatible" (adverb adjective-noun). 

This sentence would also benefit from breaking it in 2. 

 

 

Sue Hares