I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-ipfix-biflow-04.txt Reviewer: Christian Vogt Review Date: 07 June 2007 IESG Telechat date: -- Summary: Ready with comments. Comments: The document is in a good shape overall. One thing I liked in particular is the "Rationale and History" section, which describes possible design alternatives and the reasons for not choosing those. For a reader not so familiar with traffic measuring, it would be good if the key technical terms were defined in the introduction, where they are used the first time. E.g., one can quickly assume what the "metering and collection processes" do, and why these ought to be separate processes. But it would be great if the document itself would clarify this, possibly including citations to existing documents. Another thing that I think could be improved is that the figures on pages 9 and on are neither referenced nor described in the text. The text would be nicer to read if it would directly refer to the figures and explain matters based on the figures. Also, the abbreviations used in the figures should be explained. It is currently left to the reader to guess that "MP" is a metering process, and that an "Nx" is a node whoose traffic is being measured. Otherwise, go ahead with the publication. Kind regards, - Christian _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
