Hi Fred,

Comments inline.

>>From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
>>Christer Holmberg
>>Sent: 19. helmikuuta 2013 12:10
>>To: [email protected]
>>Cc: [email protected]
>>Subject: [Gen-art] Genart review of draft-templin-intarea-seal-51.txt
>> 
>>I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, 
>>please see the FAQ at 
>><http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>
>> 
>>Document:                    draft-templin-intarea-seal-51.txt
>> 
>>Reviewer:                     Christer Holmberg
>> 
>>Review Date:                 19 Feb 2013
>> 
>>IETF LC End Date:        20 Feb 2013
>> 
>>IETF Telechat Date:       21 Feb 2013
>> 
>>Summary:  The draft is well written, but with some editorial comments that I 
>>suggest to be addressed before publication.
>> 
>>Major Issues: None
>> 
>>Minor Issues: None
>> 
>>Editorial nits: See below
>> 
>>Q_ED_1: Most of the text in the Abstract section does not belong there. The 
>>section should talk about what the document does, and not define what a 
>>subnetwork is etc. Only the last sentence talks about what the draft is about.
>
>Here is a proposed rewrite of the abstract:
>
>  "The Subnetwork Encapsulation and Adaptation Layer (SEAL) operates over 
> virtual topologies configured over connected IP
>   network routing regions bounded by encapsulating border nodes. These 
> virtual topologies are manifested by tunnels that
>   may span multiple IP and/or sub-IP layer forwarding hops, where they may 
> incur packet duplication, packet reordering, source
>   address spoofing and traversal of links with diverse Maximum Transmission 
> Units (MTUs). SEAL uniquely addresses these
>   issues through the encapsulation and messaging mechanisms specified in this 
> document."

It looks good, but I would start with a "This document specifies a Subnetwork 
Encapsulation and Adaptation Layer (SEAL). SEAL operates over virtual...."


>>Q_ED_2: In the Introduction section, I would suggest to add a reference for 
>>IP encapsulating/tunneling. RFC 2003 is referenced later in the document, but 
>>I think it would be good to have something also in the Introduction.
>
>Citations for IP encapsulating/tunneling can be added as follows
>
>  "The use of IP encapsulation (also known as "tunneling") has long been 
> considered as the means for
>    creating such virtual topologies (e.g., see [RFC2003][RFC2473])."

Looks good.

>>Q_ED_3: In section 1.2, do you need to define ‘subnetwork’ here? Isn’t it 
>>better to have the definition in one single place – the Terminology section?
>
>Proposed resolution is to rewrite the first sentence of this section as 
>follows:
>
>  "This document concerns subnetworks manifested through a virtual topology 
> configured over a connected
>     network routing region and bounded by encapsulating border nodes."

Looks good.

>>Q_ED_4: In section 12, there seems to be a dot too much J
>
>I don't understand this - could you clarify?

At least in my browser, section 12 looks like:

-----

   The IANA is requested to allocate a User Port number for "SEAL" in
   the 'port-numbers' registry for the TCP and UDP protocols.

   The IANA is further requested to allocate an IP protocol number for
   "SEAL" in the "protocol-numbers" registry.

   .

-----

Note the lonely dot at the end, below the second paragraph :)

Regards,

Christer

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to