Hi, I reflected your comments and just submitted a new version(-05). Thanks, Kenji -- Kenji Kumaki, Ph.D. <ke-kumaki@xxxxxxxx> IP Network Department KDDI Corporation <C31006DE-2C8D-4116-88ED-6464B56F0532@xxxxxxxxxxxx> の、 "Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-e2e-rsvp-te-reqts-04" において、 "Ben Campbell <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxx>"さんは書きました： > I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) > reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see > 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. > > Document: draft-ietf-l3vpn-e2e-rsvp-te-reqts-04 > Reviewer: Ben Campbell > Review Date: 20-Oct-2009 > IETF LC End Date: 20-Oct-2009 > IESG Telechat date: (if known) > > Summary: > > This draft is almost ready for publication as an informational RFC. I > have a few minor and a number of editorial comments that should be > addressed prior to publication. > > *** Major issues: > > None > > *** Minor issues: > > -- section 3, paragraph 3, ""However, if a C- > RSVP signaling is to send within VPN, the service provider network > will face scalability issues." > > Can you elaborate? > > -- Section 6.4: > > Last sentence should be something to the effect that "The solution > SHOULD allow customers to receive・, right? Otherwise it looks like > normative requirements on customers. > > -- Section 7.1, last paragraph: > > Is this acceptable given the explicit requirement not to divulge > topology information mentioned in the security considerations section? > > -- Section 7.2: > > How would you judge compliance with this requirement? > > > > *** Nits/editorial comments: > > -- The draft has a bad case of acronym soup. Please make an effort to > expand acronyms on first mention, unless they are generally well known > to the community. (And by community, I mean the IETF at large, not > just the routing area). See http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev. expansion.txt > for guidance. > > -- The draft has numerous grammar errors. Please proofread it again. > In particular, watch for singular/plural mismatches, missing articles > before singular nouns, etc. Also, a spell check is in order. > > -- section 1, paragraph 1: > > Please define or describe "triple play services", or provide a > reference. > > -- Section 4.2, last paragraph: > > s/overide/override > s/premption/preemption > > -- Section 5.3 > > s/enviroment/environment > Also, don't use "/" as a conjunction--write out the words. > > -- Section 5.11: > > Is there a reference for "make-before-break"? Otherwise, please > elaborate. > > -- Section 6.1: > > Do you really mean ingress/egress? I would assume admissions control > applies to ingress. > > -- Section 6.2: > > The second sentence doesn't parse. Are there missing or extra words? > > -- Section 6.3: > > I don't follow the second sentence. Is the third sentence a > requirement that the solution support local policies for this? > > -- Section 7.4, first paragraph, first sentence: > > Is that a normative SHOULD? > > -- Section 7.4, first paragraph: > > I think you mean the solution MUST address scalability for the > following situations, right? > > -- Section 7.6, first paragraph: > > You mean to say the solution MUST address manageability consideration, > right? > > -- same section, "MIB module for C-RSVP paths and C-TE LSPs MUST > collect per a vrf > instance." > > I can't parse that sentence. > > -- same section, "If a CE is managed by service providers, MIB > information for C-RSVP > paths and C-TE LSPs from the CE MUST be collected per a customer." > > I don't understand. Who MUST collect? Do you mean to say the solution > MUST allow collection on a per customer basis? > > -- same section, 2nd to last paragraph, "Any diagnostic tool > MUST be capable of detecting failures of the control and data plane > for C-TE LSPs over a VRF instance." > > Do you intend to put requirements on the diagnostic tools themselves? > Or say "the solution MUST allow・ > > -- Section 8, numbered list: > > The list is inconsistent in using full sentences or sentence > fragments. > > -- same section, 4th paragraph: "If the CE is an untrusted router for > service providers..." > > Do you mean "...a router that is not trusted by the service provider > ". (Same pattern repeats in paragraph 5). > > > > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf