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

[Donald Eastlake <[e-mail]>]

Hi Sue,

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Susan Hares <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Trill WG:
>
> I missed one other editorial change for RFC6439bis-02.txt.
>
> RFC7180 has been obsoleted by RFC7780.  This needs to be changed.

Well, the only reference to RFC 7180 is in Appendix B where it is, in
fact, talking about RFC 7180 being obsoleted by RFC 7780. This is why
RFC 7180 was listed as an Informational reference while the many
references to RFC 7780 are mostly normative and it is listed as a
normative reference. I suggest just changing "[RFC7180]" to "RFC 7180"
in the appendix so hopefully the nits checker won't notice it :-)

See below.

> Sue
>
> From: trill [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 3:18 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: 'Donald Eastlake'; [e-mail]; '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.

I think the best think to do might be to parenthesis the "example" and
then to indent the remainder of the paragraph after the ":". See
attached for what the paragraph would then look like.

> 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).

I think "backward compatible" is a common computer term. I suppose it
is some sort of compound adjective. How about if it is hyphenated?

> This sentence would also benefit from breaking it in 2.

OK.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [e-mail]

> Sue Hares