Re: [Gen-art] Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-l2tpext-failover-11.txt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I'm going to No Objection and I suppose you'll do an RFC Editor note.

   Brian


On 2007-01-30 16:39, Mark Townsley wrote:

On second look, this is rather small. Vipin, I can do either. If you wish to provide me text in "OLD" "NEW" format, or a new document.

- Mark

Suresh Krishnan wrote:
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
draft-ietf-l2tpext-failover-11.txt

For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits
that should be fixed before publication.

Comments:

Minor:
======

* IANA considerations

The IANA considerations section does not specify the namespace from which allocation is requested for the AVPs and the message types.


Editorial:
==========

* Section 4.2 Failover Session Response

This sentence has a typo and does not read well

"It is not required to respond one FSQ message with just on FSR."

I suggest removing it altogether so that the text will simply read

"An endpoint MAY choose to respond to an FSQ message with multiple FSR
 messages"



_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]