Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-09

Request Review of draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 15)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2020-01-31
Requested 2020-01-17
Authors Thomas Watteyne , Pascal Thubert , Carsten Bormann
I-D last updated 2020-01-31
Completed reviews Intdir Last Call review of -04 by Dave Thaler (diff)
Iotdir Last Call review of -04 by Ines Robles (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -10 by Derrell Piper (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -09 by Sarah Banks (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -07 by Joerg Ott (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -08 by Francesca Palombini (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Sarah Banks
State Completed Snapshot
Review review-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-09-opsdir-lc-banks-2020-01-31
Posted at
Reviewed revision 09 (document currently at 15)
Result Has Nits
Completed 2020-01-31
    Thanks for a well written, technical draft. I have no comments that stop
    publication, however, I do have a couple of editorial comments to make,
    focused mostly at the top of the document. Also, thanks for a doc clean of
    nits, much appreciated!

- While I find the language overall to be very approachable, in the 1.
Introduction section, you wrote "till" - please consider replacing with
"until". - Also in the Introduction section, you wrote "performances may fall
behind..." - it wasn't clear which multiples of performances you were referring
to - be specific, or consider revising "performances" to "performance". - I
found the draft assumes serious familiarity of the reader on the subject. For
example, in Section 2.2, first para, "Past experience with fragmentation" - I
found myself wondering "whose past experience"? You might consider tightening
up the language here to be clear. I'll also add that including a decent list of
follow up docs was greatly appreciated, thanks! That will be helpful to a
broader audience.