Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ancp-pon-
review-ietf-ancp-pon-genart-lc-even-2012-04-05-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-ancp-pon
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 05)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2012-04-05
Requested 2012-03-22
Authors Nabil Bitar, Sanjay Wadhwa, Thomas Haag, Li Hongyu
Draft last updated 2012-04-05
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -?? by Roni Even
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Roni Even (diff)
Tsvdir Early review of -?? by Allison Mankin
Assignment Reviewer Roni Even 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-ancp-pon-genart-lc-even-2012-04-05
Review completed: 2012-04-05

Review
review-ietf-ancp-pon-genart-lc-even-2012-04-05

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>.

Sorry for the late review due to IET meeting.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.

 

Document: 

draft-ietf-ancp-pon-02

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date:2012–4–1

IETF LC End Date: 2012–3–30

IESG Telechat date:

 

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational 

RFC

.

 

Major issues:

 

Minor issues:

 

Nits/editorial comments:

 

In section 4 ”

However, the broadcast capability on the PON enables the AN (OLT) to send one copy on the PON as opposed to N  copies of a multicast channel on the PON serving N premises being  receivers” I think the “being” before the last word should be deleted

 

General editorial comment is about page breaks which can be better like section 7 title is at the end of a page and the text is in the next page. Also some of the figures and their descriptions are split between pages.