Hi, I uploaded version 04 of the document. -- Regards, Dhananjay
-----Original Message----- From: "Dhananjay Patki (dhpatki)" <dhpa...@cisco.com> Date: Friday, 3 March 2017 at 10:59 AM To: Francis Dupont <francis.dup...@fdupont.fr>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org> Cc: "draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params....@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params....@ietf.org> Subject: Re: review of draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params-03.txt Resent-From: <alias-boun...@ietf.org> Resent-To: <dhpa...@cisco.com>, <sgund...@cisco.com>, <jonghy...@smu.ac.kr>, <fuqi...@outlook.com>, <lyle.t.be...@sprint.com>, <jouni.nos...@gmail.com>, <maxpass...@gmail.com>, <suresh.krish...@ericsson.com>, <terry.mander...@icann.org>, Dapeng Liu <max....@alibaba-inc.com>, <max....@alibaba-inc.com> Resent-Date: Friday, 3 March 2017 at 10:59 AM Hi Francis, Please let me know if you are fine with the rework of if you have any further comments. -- Thanks, Dhananjay -----Original Message----- From: "Dhananjay Patki (dhpatki)" <dhpa...@cisco.com> Date: Tuesday, 28 February 2017 at 9:46 AM To: Francis Dupont <francis.dup...@fdupont.fr>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org> Cc: "draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params....@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params....@ietf.org> Subject: Re: review of draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params-03.txt Resent-From: <alias-boun...@ietf.org> Resent-To: <dhpa...@cisco.com>, <sgund...@cisco.com>, <jonghy...@smu.ac.kr>, <fuqi...@outlook.com>, <lyle.t.be...@sprint.com>, <jouni.nos...@gmail.com>, <maxpass...@gmail.com>, <suresh.krish...@ericsson.com>, <terry.mander...@icann.org>, Dapeng Liu <max....@alibaba-inc.com>, <max....@alibaba-inc.com> Resent-Date: Tuesday, 28 February 2017 at 9:46 AM Hi Francis, Please see inline responses. Also, please find attached version 04 of the draft attached to this email. I will upload the new version once you approve the rework. Or would you want the updated draft to be uploaded first? Let me know if you have any further comments. -- Thanks, Dhananjay -----Original Message----- From: Francis Dupont <francis.dup...@fdupont.fr> Date: Monday, 27 February 2017 at 5:00 PM To: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org> Cc: "draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params....@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params....@ietf.org> Subject: review of draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params-03.txt Resent-From: <alias-boun...@ietf.org> Resent-To: <dhpa...@cisco.com>, <sgund...@cisco.com>, <jonghy...@smu.ac.kr>, <fuqi...@outlook.com>, <lyle.t.be...@sprint.com>, <jouni.nos...@gmail.com>, <maxpass...@gmail.com>, <suresh.krish...@ericsson.com>, <terry.mander...@icann.org>, Dapeng Liu <max....@alibaba-inc.com>, <max....@alibaba-inc.com> Resent-Date: Monday, 27 February 2017 at 5:11 PM I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params-03.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 20170217 IETF LC End Date: 20170224 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: - ToC page 2 and 9 (title) page 8: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments [Dhananjay] Both spellings are valid. I see the former in many RFCs. So I left it as it is. - 1 page 2: you must expand the abbrevs at first use in the body of the document: the abstract is not a part of the body. [Dhananjay] Corrected - 1 page 2: singaling -> signaling [Dhananjay] Corrected - 3 page 3: suboptions -> sub-options (because the dash was at all other uses) [Dhananjay] Corrected - 3 page 4: the wording "The sub-options are optional" is ambiguous: it can mean that there is no mandatory sub-options or that the field can be empty. Obviously it is the first according to the section 3 intro "MUST contain one or more". [Dhananjay] Corrected. Reworded as follows. “LCMP Sub-options are described in the below sections. The sub-options can be present in any order. Inclusion of any specific sub-option is optional, but at least one sub-option MUST be present.” - 3.1 page 4: Binding Refresh Control Sub-Option -> Binding Re-registration Control Sub-Option (it is the official name of the option cf section 6) [Dhananjay] Corrected - authors' addresses page 12: China -> P.R. China or ISO 3166 CN BTW I have a question about the "Kansas": I can understand to put only the state for California or Texas but Kansas? (:-) [Dhananjay] Changed China to P.R. China (though I find many RFCs that use just China). Is there anything to be corrected for “Kansas”? :-) Regars francis.dup...@fdupont.fr _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
