Hi Vijay, The line numbers are removed in the -15 version of the draft. Thanks, Acee > On Dec 18, 2023, at 2:04 PM, Acee Lindem <acee.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > In any case, I’m not enamored with the line numbers in the pseudo code (irrespective of whether or not they are adoring). These were introduced in RFC 5798 but I don’t see any references to these line numbers (as their existence would imply) and unless anyone sees compelling reason to keep them, I’m going to remove them. > > Thanks, > Acee > >> On Dec 18, 2023, at 13:53, Vijay Gurbani <vijay.gurbani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Sorry, I meant "adorning code" instead of "adoring code" in the last >> sentence of the nits/editorial comments. >> >> Thanks, >> >> - vijay >> >> On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 12:51 PM Vijay Gurbani via Datatracker < >> noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Reviewer: Vijay Gurbani >>> Review result: Ready >>> >>> 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://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>. >>> >>> Document: draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-rfc5798bis-14 >>> Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani >>> Review Date: 2023-12-18 >>> IETF LC End Date: 2023-12-11 >>> IESG Telechat date: 2024-01-04 >>> >>> Summary: The I-D is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard. The >>> document >>> is well written, with reasons why critical choices in the development of >>> the >>> protocol have been made. >>> >>> Major issues: 0 >>> >>> Minor issues: 0 >>> >>> Nits/editorial comments: 1 >>> >>> Nits: I am not sure what the line numbers in Section 6.4.1 and 6.4.2 mean > -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
