Scott, Many thanks for your review.
> -----Original Message----- [snip] > > Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an informational RFC. > > Major issues: > > Minor issues: > > Nits/editorial comments: > > - In this one paragraph: > > Note that although Figure 4 only shows a single S-PE, a PW may > transit more one S-PE along its path. This architecture is > applicable when the S-PEs are statically chosen, or when they are > chosen using a dynamic path selection mechanism. Both directions > of an MS-PW must traverse the same set of S-PEs on a reciprocal > path. Note that although the S-PE path is therefore reciprocal, > the path taken by the PSN tunnels between the T-PEs and S-PEs may > not be reciprocal due to choices made by the PSN routing protocol. > > ... "reciprocal" is used, but nowhere else in the document. Should > it be "bi-directional" (used elsewhere)? We mean 'reciprocal' here rather than bidirectional. This section uses the term reciprocal to refer to the corresponding, but opposite directions of a PW. Thus we are using the navigational definition of the term. > > > - 15.1 "References" should be "Normative References" Actually I think we need to split the references properly into normative and informative references. Since this is also an informational draft, it is also inappropriate to cite RFC2119. The editors therefore propose rearranging the references as follows: 15. References 15.1. Normative References [1] Bryant, S. and Pate, P. (Editors), "Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) Architecture", RFC 3985, March 2005 [2] Andersson, L. and Madsen, T., "Provider Provisioned Virtual Private Network (VPN) Terminology", RFC 4026, March 2005 [3] Rosen, E. Viswanathan, A. and Callon, R., "Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031, January 2001 [4] Malis, A. and Townsley, M., "Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) Fragmentation and Reassembly", RFC 4623, August 2006 15.2. Informative References [5] Martini, L. Bitar, N. and Bocci, M (Editors), "Requirements for Multi-Segment Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3)", RFC 5254, October 2008 [6] Bryant, S. & Andersson, L. "JWT Report on MPLS Architectural Considerations for a Transport profile", RFC 5317, February 2009 Also, in removing the RFC2119 citation we spotted one MUST that is inappropriate for this informational draft, and removed the 'conventions used in this document' section. The inappropriate MUST is in section 1.3 bullet 3, where we propose the following change: OLD: o Multi-Segment Pseudowire (MS-PW). A static or dynamically configured set of two or more contiguous PW segments that behave and function as a single point-to-point PW. Each end of a MS-PW by definition MUST terminate on a T-PE. NEW: o Multi-Segment Pseudowire (MS-PW). A static or dynamically configured set of two or more contiguous PW segments that behave and function as a single point-to-point PW. Each end of a MS-PW by definition terminates on a T-PE. Best regards Matthew > > > Scott > _______________________________________________ > pwe3 mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3 _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
