Russ,
Agree on both points. I have:
- removed the word "unique"
- moved Section 6 to an appendix
Thanks for the review.
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russ Housley [mailto:housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2015 10:30 AM
> To: draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping.all@xxxxxxxx
> Cc: IETF Gen-ART <gen-art@xxxxxxxx>; IETF <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-04
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-
> ART, please see the FAQ at
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you
> may receive.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-04
> Reviewer: Russ Housley
> Review Date: 2014-09-25
> IETF LC End Date: 2014-10-02
> IESG Telechat date: unknown
>
> Summary: Ready.
>
> Major Concerns: None.
>
> Minor Concerns: None.
>
> Other Comments:
>
> At the end of Section 1, the document says: "Each protocol listens on its own
> UDP port and executes its own unique procedures." What does "unique"
> mean here? What changes if "unique" is dropped from this sentence?
>
> Would it be more obvious to the reader the purpose of Section 6 if it were
> turned into an appendix?