Last Call Review of draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-11
review-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-11-genart-lc-taylor-2014-10-03-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 12) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2014-10-09 | |
| Requested | 2014-09-25 | |
| Authors | Carol Davids , Vijay K. Gurbani , Scott Poretsky | |
| Draft last updated | 2014-10-03 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -08
by
Miguel Angel García
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -11 by Tom Taylor (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Tom Taylor |
| State | Completed | |
| Review |
review-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-11-genart-lc-taylor-2014-10-03
|
|
| Reviewed revision | 11 (document currently at 12) | |
| Result | Ready with Issues | |
| Completed | 2014-10-03 |
review-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-11-genart-lc-taylor-2014-10-03-00
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 resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-11 Reviewer: Tom Taylor Review Date: 2014-10-02 IETF LC End Date: 2014-10-09 IESG Telechat date: (if known) Summary: Ready with minor issues and nits. I did not check out the correctness of the code in Appendix A. Major issues: ------------ Minor issues: ------------ (1) Sec. 4.10 paragraphs 3 and 4: I believe these are about setting the initial value for the attempt rate. The first paragraph offers the alternative of using a vendor-provided value R as a starting point or using r=R as a starting point. Doesn't seem like two alternatives. The second paragraph ignores all this and sets r=100 as the starting point. But then it repeats text about using a vendor-supplied value. The two paragraphs need cleaning up. (2) The algorithm in 4.10 seems fairly unsophisticated, and amounts to ten iterations of constrained binary search. Was application of Newton's Method http://www.ima.umn.edu/%7Emiller/Newton-MVT.pdf to give you faster convergence and shorter test runs considered? Nits/editorial comments: ----------------------- IDNits requests that the code in Appendix A be preceded by a <CODE BEGINS> line and terminated by a <CODE ENDS> line. Sec. 3 para 2 last line: s/arrangements/arrangement/ Next para: spell out EA as presumably "Emulated Agents" on first use? Term is from the terminology document. Add <CODE BEGINS> and <CODE ENDS> around the pseudo-code in 4.10. Reference [I-D.sip-bench-term] is now dated July, 2014 (version -11).