Hi, Here are a few small comments that I found doing my review. They did not warrant holding up IETF last call, but can be fixed along the way... Cheers, Adrian === Section 2.2 has An E-Tree service has one or more Root ACs and many Leaf ACs. I suggest that "many" is not a necessary part of the definition although it may be probable in deployments. For the definition I think you need: An E-Tree service has one or more Root ACs and at least one Leaf AC. --- Section 2.3.1 para 2 s/fame/frame/ --- Figure 1 shows two notations "E-Tree". The associated arrows do not make it clear what is the extent of the E-tree since the top one and the bottom one show different edge points. Can you tidy that up? > -----Original Message----- > From: L2vpn [mailto:l2vpn-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of The IESG > Sent: 01 July 2014 15:09 > To: IETF-Announce > Cc: l2vpn@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk-06.txt> (A Framework for > Ethernet Tree (E-Tree) Service over a Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) > Network) to Informational RFC > > > The IESG has received a request from the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks > WG (l2vpn) to consider the following document: > - 'A Framework for Ethernet Tree (E-Tree) Service over a Multiprotocol > Label Switching (MPLS) Network' > <draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-frwk-06.txt> as Informational RFC > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2014-07-15. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.