Dear Ketan: Looks good. Thank you for attending to my comments. On Thu, Aug 18, 2022, 8:46 PM Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
