Thanks for this document which was surprisingly readable.
I have a number of comments from my AD review, but they are all
trivial and can be handled as IETF last call comments.
Thanks,
Adrian
---
Nurit will want to change the minor details or her affiliation.
---
Abstract
Expand MPLS-TP and PW on first use.
Expand MS
s/recommendations/Recommendations/ >>> Apply throughout document
s/nor/or/
---
Section 1
s/telecommunication/Telecommunication/
---
Section 1.2
s/Administration and Maintenance/Administration, and Maintenance/
---
Section 3.4
s/APPENDIX/Appendix/
---
Section 3.5
Please expand PW
---
Section 3.7
One might ask whether a co-routed bidirectional path that traverses a
LAG or a link bundle uses the same component links in both directions.
---
Section 3.8 could probably usefully mention routing along with
signaling.
---
Section 3.11
s/physical channels/a physical channel/
---
Section 3.16
Please expand LSR
---
One paragraph in 3.17 is a bit wild.
Therefore, in the context of MPLS-TP LSP or PW Maintenance Entity
(defined below) LERs and T-PEs can be MEPs while LSRs and S-PEs can
be MIPs. In the case of Tandem Connection Maintenance Entity
(defined below), LSRs and S-PEs can be either MEPs or MIPs.
s/context of/context of a/
"PW Maintenance Entity" is not defined below (I think).
Please expand LER
I don't find the definition of "Tandem Connection Maintenance Entity"
Maybe you could say
...the case of a Maintenance Entity for a Tandem Connection (defined below)
Please expand S-PE
---
Section 3.19
Penultimate paragraph
Second instance s/(e.g. count packets)./(e.g. counts packets)./
---
Section 3.23
s/described in three ways:/described in one of three ways:/
s/Sub-Path Maintenance Element, and/Sub-Path Maintenance Element, or/
s/as a Tandem Connections./as a Tandem Connection./
---
Section 3.23.2 Section header
s/(SMPE):/(SPME):/
---
Section 3.35
The use of pipe ("|") and curly braces ("{" and "}") could usefully be
replaced with English language.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-announce-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-announce-
> bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of The IESG
> Sent: 02 October 2013 22:45
> To: IETF-Announce
> Cc: mpls@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-12.txt> (A Thesaurus for
the
> Terminology used in Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport Profile (MPLS-TP)
> drafts/RFCs and ITU-T's Transport Network Recommendations.) to Informational
> RFC
>
>
> The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG
> (mpls) to consider the following document:
> - 'A Thesaurus for the Terminology used in Multiprotocol Label Switching
> Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) drafts/RFCs and ITU-T's Transport
> Network Recommendations.'
> <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone-12.txt> as Informational RFC