Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-ndata-12

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

 



> On 25. Aug 2017, at 13:28, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hi Michael
> 
> Sorry I misread the text.
> 
> The text is fine as it is, and I leave it to you to see if there is an improvement with a common definition.
I think the change
https://github.com/sctplab/sctp-idata/commit/768dac9acbeff654ecea782bf682392fad4d4709
makes the text more readable.
> 
> I am correcting the review.
Thanks for the quick feedback!

Best regards
Michael
> 
> - Stewart
> 
> 
> On 25/08/2017 11:53, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>>> On 14. Aug 2017, at 22:02, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
>>> Review result: Ready
>>> 
>> Hi Stewart,
>> 
>> thanks for your review. See my comment in-line.
>> 
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>>> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>>> like any other last call comments.
>>> 
>>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>>> 
>>> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>>> 
>>> Document: draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-ndata-12
>>> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
>>> Review Date: 2017-08-14
>>> IETF LC End Date: 2017-08-25
>>> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>>> 
>>> Summary: This is a well written draft and is ready for publication.
>>> 
>>> Major issues: None
>>> 
>>> Minor issues: None
>>> 
>>> Nits/editorial comments:
>>> 
>>> You repeat the text:
>>> 
>>> "A message is considered in flight, if at least  on of its I-DATA chunks is not
>>> acknowledged in a non-renegable way"  in two consecutive sections, maybe a
>>> common definition could be used.
>> The first text covers "Message in flight", the second covers "Fragment in flight".
>> What is duplicated is the text (i.e. acknowledged by the cumulative TSN Ack) for
>> explaining "acknowledged in a non-renegable way". Giving the explanation only once
>> improves readability, I guess.
>> 
>> Best regards
>> Michael
> 

<<attachment: smime.p7s>>


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