Telechat Review of draft-ietf-6lo-fragment-recovery-12
review-ietf-6lo-fragment-recovery-12-genart-telechat-yee-2020-02-16-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-6lo-fragment-recovery |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 21) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2020-02-18 | |
| Requested | 2020-02-12 | |
| Authors | Pascal Thubert | |
| I-D last updated | 2020-02-16 | |
| Completed reviews |
Iotdir Last Call review of -07
by Erik Nordmark
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -08 by Peter E. Yee (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Tirumaleswar Reddy.K (diff) Tsvart Last Call review of -11 by Colin Perkins (diff) Genart Telechat review of -12 by Peter E. Yee (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Peter E. Yee |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-6lo-fragment-recovery by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/JxmnjXz8tAns0cKAT_hnIG1ZUbg | |
| Reviewed revision | 12 (document currently at 21) | |
| Result | Ready w/nits | |
| Completed | 2020-02-16 |
review-ietf-6lo-fragment-recovery-12-genart-telechat-yee-2020-02-16-00
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 wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-6lo-fragment-recovery-12 Reviewer: Peter Yee Review Date: 2020-02-16 IETF LC End Date: None IESG Telechat date: 2020-02-20 Summary: This revision mostly covers the items I raised during my initial review. Some remain and there are some new nits to be addressed. (Ready with Nits) Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: Page 8, section 5, 2nd paragraph, last sentence: Change “It results” to “The result is”. Page 12, RFRAG Acknowledgment Bitmap, 2nd sentence: delete “that”. Page 12, RFRAG Acknowledgment Bitmap, 3rd sentence: delete “that”. Change the comma to a semicolon. Page 12, section 6, 1st paragraph, last sentence: change “associated to” to “associated with”. Page 13, 1st full paragraph, 1st sentence: change “TimeOut” to “Time Out”. Page 13, 5th full paragraph, 1st sentence: change “in” to “on”. Page 13, 5th full paragraph, 3rd sentence: change “abort” to “aborts”. Page 14, 3rd paragraph, 1st sentence: change “a same” to one of “any”, “any single”, or something similar. These suggestions are based on the assumption that fragments from disparate datagrams are not intermingled, otherwise you’ll need some other description of what you want to do in order to allow fragments to get a few hops away. Page 14, section 6.1, 2nd paragraph, last sentence: change “at” to “in”. Page 15, section 6.1.1, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: append “receiving” after “Upon”. Consider changing “a” to “the” before “first”. Page 15, section 6.1.1, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: change “to match” to “matching”. Page 16, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “in” to “is”. Page 16, section 6.3, 1st sentence: change “sequence” to “Sequence”. Personally, I find the mixing of cases between these header fields inconsistent. I’d prefer you choose one style and use it consistently. Page 18, section 7, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: change “This” to “These”. Page 18, section 7, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: insert a space between “10” and “Kbps”. Page 18, section 7, 3rd paragraph, 2nd sentence: append a comma after “window size”. Page 18, section 7.1, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: change “a same” to “the same”. Page 18, section 7.1, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “a same” to “the same”. Page 18, section 7.1, inter-frame gap, 1st sentence: change “a minimum” to “the minimum”. Page 18, section 7.1, inter-frame gap, 2nd sentence: change “a same” to “the same” in both places in the sentence. Overall, I couldn’t quite parse this sentence. “may be subject to receive while transmitting” left me guessing as to what exactly you wanted to convey here. Please rewrite this sentence. Page 19, 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: append a comma after “(Fragment_Size)”. Page 19, 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: change “node” to “nodes”. Delete “the” before “fluidity”. Page 19, OptFragmentSize, 2nd sentence: change “more” to “greater”. Page 19, OptFragmentSize, 4th sentence: change “On” to “For”. Change “enable” to “account for”. Delete “of” before “the Hop Limit”. Page 19, OptFragmentSize, 5th sentence: change “On” to “For”. Page 19, OptWindowSize, last sentence: change “in” to “on”. Page 20, OptARQTimeOut, 1st sentence: change “starting point of the value” to “initial value”. Change “that” to “which”. Insert “the” before “amount”. Change “a next” to “the next”. Page 20, OptARQTimeOut, 2nd sentence: change “more” to “greater”. Page 20, MaxARQTimeOut, 2nd sentence: change “in” to “on”. Page 20, first paragraph after MaxDatagramRetries: change “to perform” to “of performing”. Change the comma to a semicolon. Insert “see” before “more”. Page 20, UseECN: append a comma after “MaxFragmentSize”. Page 21, section 7.2, 1st sentence: change “amount” to “number”. Delete “the” before “Window_Size”. Change “OptDatagramSize” (this term does not exist elsewhere in the draft) to “OptFragmentSize”. Page 22, section 10, 2nd sentence: Append a comma after “Bormann”. Page 22, section 10, 3rd sentence: change “ot” to “to”.