Subject: Gen-art review of draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-basic-schemes-revised-05

From: Elwyn Davies <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:57:36 +0100

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
_http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html_).

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

Document: draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-basic-schemes-revised-05.txt
Reviewer: Elwyn Davies
Review Date: 18 July 2008
IETF LC End Date: 29 July 2008
IESG Telechat date: n/a

Summary:
Nearly ready for IESG.  A few minor issues mainly with failure to 
specify encodings and a couple of corner cases. A few editorial nits 
noted below.

Comments:

s3.2.1: Need to explicitly document the encoding used for SBNs (also 
applies to s4.2.1 and s5.2.1. s5.2.1 also needs to specify encoding for 
Source Block Length).
s3.2.1, bottom of page 6/top of page 7: s/is processed at/to process the 
block by/ (two places) (or some such .. it doesn't read well at present).
s3.2.2.2: need to explicitly state encoding of various values (unsigned 
integers I assume). (also applies to s4.2.2.2, s4.2.2.3, s5.2.2.2
s4.2.2.3:  The case where the length is zero is a lttle odd!  I think it 
would be worth explicitly stating that (either) the whole object is just 
one octet long (or) it is four octets padded with zeroes.  The latter 
case might make processing more consistent since otherwise the zero case 
is special and the only case where the object is not four octet aligned.
s5.1:  it is not possible to encode the source block length of 65536 in 
16 bits unless 0 is overloaded to mean 2^^16.  This isn't specified. (I 
assume 'at most' to be read as 'less than or equal').

Editorial:

Abstract:  Need to expand FEC at least once!
s1, 2nd para after bullets: genrally not recommended to mention WG
s1, last para: s/listed/are listed/
s3.2.1: Need to asociate Source Block Number and SBN explicitly (well, I 
assume that is what SBN means!).
s3.4.1, next to last para: s/implementor of/implementor/
s3.4.2, lastpara: s/substracting/subtracting/
s4.4.2.2: I take the reference in the last para of the section (just 
above Fig 4) should be to s3.2.2.2.
s10, 2nd bullet: s/th/the/
s10, 3rd bullet: s/sis/did/

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf