Skip to main content

Telechat Review of draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point-
review-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point-genart-telechat-holmberg-2012-05-11-00

Request Review of draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Telechat Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2012-05-08
Requested 2012-04-26
Authors Malcolm Betts
I-D last updated 2012-05-11
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -?? by Christer Holmberg
Genart Telechat review of -?? by Christer Holmberg
Secdir Last Call review of -?? by Jeffrey Hutzelman
Assignment Reviewer Christer Holmberg
State Completed
Request Telechat review on draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Completed 2012-05-11
review-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point-genart-telechat-holmberg-2012-05-11-00
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 wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a
new version of the draft.

Document: draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point-04

Reviewer: Christer Holmberg

Review Date: 7 May 2012

IETF LC End Date: 21 March 2012

IESG Telechat date: 10 May 2012

Summary: The draft is ready for publication, with a couple of editorial nits.

Major issues: -

Minor issues: -

Nits/editorial comments:



(The comments also applied to the -03 version, and I apologize for not bringing
them up when I reviewed that version.)

- General: G-ACh is mentioned throughout the document, but only in section 4 is
there a reference to RFC 5586. I suggest to add a reference on first occurrence
at least to section 1. It would probably be good also in section 3.



- Section 1: What is the purpose of the last paragraph, talking about IETF
Experts not agreeing? For someone who has not followed the work, it seems as
little strange.

- Section 3: The text says “The G-ACh Type assigned by this document”. I guess
it would be better to say e.g. “based on this document”.

Regards,

Christer