Telechat Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-12
review-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-12-genart-telechat-holmberg-2013-10-25-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 13) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2013-10-22 | |
| Requested | 2013-10-17 | |
| Authors | Sergio Belotti , Pietro Grandi , Daniele Ceccarelli , Diego Caviglia , Fatai Zhang , Dan Li | |
| I-D last updated | 2013-10-25 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -11
by Christer Holmberg
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -12 by Christer Holmberg (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -11 by Warren "Ace" Kumari (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Christer Holmberg |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Reviewed revision | 12 (document currently at 13) | |
| Result | Ready w/nits | |
| Completed | 2013-10-25 |
review-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-12-genart-telechat-holmberg-2013-10-25-00
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-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-12 Reviewer: Christer Holmberg Review Date: 24 October IETF LC End Date: 19 September, 2013 IESG Telechat date: 24 October Summary: The document is well written, and ready for publication, but I think one of the editorial nit I previously raised is still not addressed. Major issues: - Minor issues: - Nits/editorial comments: General: ----------- Q_G_1: The document still uses inconsistent terminology when referencing ITU-T specifications. Examples: - G.709 [G.709-2012] - [G.709-2012] - ITU-T G.872 recommendation [G.872] - G.709-2012 - ITU-T G.798 [G.798] etc etc... When I sent my previous review, you suggestion was to use " ITU-T recommendation G.XXX used on first use and then just G.XXX".