Last Call Review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-06
review-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-06-genart-lc-garcia-2013-02-15-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 08) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
Deadline | 2013-02-11 | |
Requested | 2013-01-31 | |
Authors | Luyuan Fang , Dr. Nabil N. Bitar , Raymond Zhang , Masahiro Daikoku , Ping Pan | |
I-D last updated | 2013-02-15 | |
Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -06
by Miguel Angel García
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -07 by Miguel Angel García (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Miguel Angel García |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 06 (document currently at 08) | |
Result | Ready | |
Completed | 2013-02-15 |
review-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-06-genart-lc-garcia-2013-02-15-00
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (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 comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-06 Reviewer: Miguel Garcia <Miguel.A.Garcia at ericsson.com> Review Date: 2013-02-10 IETF LC End Date: 2013-02-11 IESG Telechat date: Summary: The document is almost ready for publication as Informational RFC, but has some NITS that should be addressed. Major issues: none Minor issues: none Nits/editorial comments: - The RFC Editor rules require to expand each acronym at a first usage. I noticed that the draft uses Section 2 as a container of all the acronyms, but most of these acronyms have already been used in Section 1. So, I am not sure if the current text is acceptable to the RFC Editor. Perhaps the authors should send them a question. One potential idea to explore is leaving the first paragraph of Section 1 in there, and move the rest of the Section to a new Section 3, whose potential title is "Background". This will solve that problem. - It appears that Section is alphabetically ordered, but the term "NMS" is misplaced. - Section 3.3.2, first paragraph. The text refers to "PSW/SGW or ASNGW)". Section 2 expands "PSW" as Packet Data Network Gateway. I suspect the acronym is wrong, because the Packet Data Network Gateway is commonly abbreviated as PDN GW or P-GW. I have never seen PSW to refer to a PDN GW or P-GW. /Miguel -- Miguel A. Garcia +34-91-339-3608 Ericsson Spain