Matt, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this 
document.

Lars


> On 2021-7-13, at 19:47, Matt Joras via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Matt Joras
> 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-netmod-nmda-diff-??
> Reviewer: Matt Joras
> Review Date: 2021-07-13
> IETF LC End Date: 2021-07-02
> IESG Telechat date: 2021-07-15
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> Consider rewording this sentence in performance considerations:
> 
> "One possibility for an implementation to mitigate against such a possibility
> is to limit the number of requests that is served to a client, or to any 
> number
> of clients, in any one time interval, rejecting requests made at a higher
> frequency than the implementation can reasonably sustain."
> 
> It is excessively wordy and uses the word "possibility" twice. I would suggest
> breaking this into two separate sentences.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

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

Reply via email to