Re: Artart telechat review of draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost-08

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Yes, I believe that the changes made were sufficient.

On 8 May 2017 at 22:15, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) <ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> just to double check: do you think this document is ready now and all your comments have been addressed?
>
> Mirja
>
>
>> Am 27.04.2017 um 13:57 schrieb Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Nozay) <sabine.randriamasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> Hello Martin,
>>
>> I just posted an update where the " Requirements Language" text has been moved in a section 1.1.
>> As I saw it on a number of other ietf drafts, I also added the sentence
>> "When the words appear in lower case, their natural language meaning is used."
>>
>> The update and status are available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost/
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sabine
>>
>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Martin Thomson [mailto:martin.thomson@xxxxxxxxx]
>>>> Sent: 26 April 2017 08:39
>>>> To: Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Nozay) <sabine.randriamasy@nokia-
>>>> bell-labs.com>
>>>> Cc: art@xxxxxxxx; alto@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-alto-multi-
>>>> cost.all@xxxxxxxx
>>>> Subject: Re: Artart telechat review of draft-ietf-alto-multi-cost-08
>>>>
>>>> On 26 April 2017 at 03:26, Randriamasy, Sabine (Nokia - FR/Nozay)
>>>> <sabine.randriamasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>> This document doesn't cite RFC 2119, but it uses the keywords.
>>>>> [SR     ] RFC 2119 is cited on page 1, section " Requirements Language" and
>>>> section "9.1.  Normative References". Should it be referenced elsewhere?
>>>>
>>>> The convention is to put those in the body, I missed it in the boilerplate.
>>>>
>>>> I skimmed the other changes, and they look fine.
>




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]