Hi David, This will be good. Thanks Roni From: Black, David [mailto:david.black@xxxxxxx] Hi Roni, Looks like this was missed - sorry for the absence of a response. WRT section 6.3.2 (now section 5.3.2) “persistently fails to deliver acceptable TDM service” is discussed in significant detail in Appendix A of the referenced [ID-ietf-pals-congcons] - it turns out to be a much longer discussion by comparison to section 6.3.1 (now section 5.3.1) that involves references to ITU-T G.826 and G.875. I’d prefer not to reproduce or try to summarize that discussion in the tsvwg-circuit-breaker draft, but a sentence could be added to the end of that section to point the reader in the right direction, e.g.: “See Appendix A of [ID-ietf-pals-congcons] for further discussion.” Thanks, --David From: Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv@xxxxxxxxx] 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-tsvwg-circuit-breaker-11 Reviewer: Roni Even Review Date:2016–2-8 IETF LC End Date: 2016–2-9 IESG Telechat date: Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a BCP RFC. Major issues: Minor issues: In section 6.3.2 the proposal is “For that reason, the draft suggests that a managed circuit breaker that shuts down a PW when it persistently fails to deliver acceptable TDM service is a useful means for addressing these congestion concerns.” I accepted to see some definition of “persistently fails” at least similar to section 6.3.1. Nits/editorial comments: |