Jouni -

Thanx for the review.

I have addressed the editorial issues you raised - though I will wait for 
additional comments from other reviewers before publishing a new version.

   Les


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jouni Korhonen via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 6:11 AM
> To: gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-te-app....@ietf.org; l...@ietf.org
> Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-te-app-13
> 
> Reviewer: Jouni Korhonen
> Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
> 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-isis-te-app-??
> Reviewer: Jouni Korhonen
> Review Date: 2020-05-29
> IETF LC End Date: 2020-05-29
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> 
> Summary:
> 
> Not really my area of expertise, however, I did not spot any issues during the
> review. The document is ready for publication.
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> None.
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> None.
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> * There are spacing issues mostly with parenthesis in the text that the RFC
> editor likely takes care of. * On line 165 SR is used without expanding it. 
> The
> expansion is obvious but the RFC has both "Segment Routing" and "Shared
> Risk"
> used with SRxx.. * At least Section 5 has "is NOT" and "does NOT" emphasis
> used. I would use just "is not" and "does not", since those with "NOT" are
> not
> in listed in normal "Requirements Language".
> 

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to