Vijay, thanks for your review. Jana, thanks for addressing Vijay's comments. I entered a Yes ballot. Alissa On Wed, Dec 2, 2020, at 1:44 PM, Lucas Pardue wrote: > Hi Vijay, > > Thanks for the review! Since the QUIC WG uses a Github Workflow I've > created a separate issue for each of the items in your review, see > in-line responses for the precise issue link. All issues are track in > the milestone https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/milestone/22 > > We'd appreciate it if you could coordinate with the Recovery document > editors via GitHub, on the issue itself and/or any Pull Request that > might be raised to address your comments. > > Cheers > Lars and Lucas > QUIC WG Co-chairs > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 5:28 PM Vijay Gurbani via Datatracker > <noreply@xxxxxxxx> 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-quic-recovery-32 > > Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani > > Review Date: 2020-12-02 > > IETF LC End Date: 2020-11-16 > > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > > > Summary: Ready for publication with nits/minor issues. > > > > Major issues: 0 > > > > Minor issues: 2 (Sn refers to Section n) > > > > - S1: "Mechanisms described in this document follow the spirit of existing > > TCP congestion control and loss recovery mechanisms, described in RFCs, > > various Internet-drafts, or academic papers ..." ==> It may be helpful > > to provide some references to the RFCs and academic papers. On the > > academic paper side, a couple of survey papers may help. A quick > > search indicates the following recent publications may be useful: > > > > [1] Al-Saadi, R., Armitage, G., But, J. and Branch, P., 2019. A survey > > of delay-based and hybrid TCP congestion control algorithms. IEEE > > Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 21(4), pp.3609-3638. > > [2] Widmer, J., Denda, R. and Mauve, M., 2001. A survey on TCP-friendly > > congestion control. IEEE network, 15(3), pp.28-37. > > > > For RFCs, perhaps rfc5681 is useful to cite? Any others? > > > > - S4.2, first paragraph: Perhaps citing rfc6298 is helpful here to further > > provide information on the "retransmission ambiguity" problem? > > > > Nits/editorial comments: 0 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art > -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
