Hi Vijay,
The recent update below includes changes to address your comments.
Thanks,
Ketan
On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 7:00 AM Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Ketan: Sounds good. Thank you for your time attending to my comments.- vijayOn Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 12:26 AM Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> 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 <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-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 constructionKT> Fixed- Sec. 3.6: Is Figure 7 missing the trailing "//" for sub-TLV tpes?KT> Fixed.Thanks,Ketan
Thanks.
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
