[tsvwg] Mike Bishop's No Objection on draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-30: (with COMMENT)

[Mike Bishop via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Mike Bishop has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb-30: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-nqb/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Several abbreviations are used in this document without expansion or
definition, or where the definition/expansion occurs later in the document. For
example, "EF" is used in 6.3 without expansion or reference. Section 10
contains the reference to RFC3246, but the expansion to Expedited Forwarding
isn't until Appendix B. (There is also a definition in RFC 4594, which is
referenced in 6.3, but it's not clear from the text that the definition of
these abbreviations can be found there.) DSCP is expanded in the abstract and
again mid-way through Section 4, but used in abbreviated form throughout
Section 1 and the preceding paragraphs of Section 4. The same could be said for
VA, MSB, CSx, etc. and the equivalence between "Diffserv" and "Differentiated
Services."

The use of "gear" rather than "equipment" feels at odds with the otherwise
formal tone of the specification, but that's a stylistic choice.