Hi Vijay, The recent update below includes changes to address your comments.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo-10 Thanks, Ketan On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 7:00 AM Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Ketan: Sounds good. Thank you for your time attending to my comments. > > - vijay > > On Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 12:26 AM Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.i...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Vijay, >> >> Thanks for your review and please check inline below for responses. >> >> The changes discussed below would reflect in the next update of the >> document. >> >> On Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 1:20 AM Vijay Gurbani via Datatracker < >> nore...@ietf.org> wrote: >> >>> Reviewer: Vijay Gurbani >>> 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-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo-?? >>> Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani >>> Review Date: 2022-08-12 >>> IETF LC End Date: 2022-08-17 >>> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat >>> >>> Summary: Draft is ready with nits for a Proposed Standard. >>> >>> Major issues: 0 >>> >>> Minor issues: 1 (please see below) >>> >>> Nits/editorial comments: 4 (please see below) >>> >>> Minor: >>> - Sec. 3.6: Note that Type is "TBD" here. Should this be 1046, as shown >>> in >>> Table 1? (Or is the use of 1046 still under discussion?) >>> >> >> KT> This allocation is currently under "Expert Review" - at this point, >> it is a suggested code point. This will hopefully be completed soon and we >> will update the document once done. >> >> >>> >>> Nits: >>> - I note that certain acronyms --- IGP, NLRI, ASLA --- are not defined. >>> I >>> suspect that these are well-known in the community, hence need no >>> definition. >>> Just in case they are not, you may consider expanding the rare ones on >>> first >>> use. >> >> >> KT> Ack. Fixed some of these acronyms that are not well-known on their >> first use. >> >> >>> - Sec. 1: s/Flexible algorithm is called so as/Flexible algorithm is so >>> called because/ >> >> >> KT> Fixed >> >> >>> - Sec. 2: s/Definition(s) (FAD) advertised by a node >>> is/Definition(s) (FAD) advertised by a node is (are)/ >>> Reason: symmetry in the sentence construction >>> >> >> KT> Fixed >> >> >>> - Sec. 3.6: Is Figure 7 missing the trailing "//" for sub-TLV tpes? >>> >> >> KT> Fixed. >> >> Thanks, >> Ketan >> >> >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> >>>
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
