Subject: [Anima] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-anima-asa-guidelines-05: (with COMMENT)

From: Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 05:26:21 -0800

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-asa-guidelines-05: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-anima-asa-guidelines/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Found terminology that should be reviewed for inclusivity; see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/part2/#inclusive_language for background and more
guidance:

 * Term "traditional"; alternatives might be "classic", "classical",
   "common", "conventional", "customary", "fixed", "habitual", "historic",
   "long-established", "popular", "prescribed", "regular", "rooted",
   "time-honored", "universal", "widely used", "widespread".

Thanks to Thomas Fossati for their General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/ohsgWQpj39CLR4OuF6XAWQGpGpA).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there
will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
did with these suggestions.

Section 3.4. , paragraph 3, nit:
> iques such as network function virtualization or network slicing, there will
>                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do not mix variants of the same word ("virtualization" and "virtualisation")
within a single text.

Section 6.2. , paragraph 2, nit:
>  explained in detail in the next sub-section: [instances of ASAs of a given
>                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^
This word is normally spelled as one.

Section 6.3. , paragraph 5, nit:
> del; as noted in Section 5, YANG serialized as CBOR may be used directly as
>                                  ^^^^^^^^^^
Do not mix variants of the same word ("serialize" and "serialise") within a
single text.

Section 12.2. , paragraph 4, nit:
> nda, P., and P. Lynch, "Network Virtualization Research Challenges", RFC 8568
>                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do not mix variants of the same word ("virtualization" and "virtualisation")
within a single text.

Section 12.2. , paragraph 14, nit:
> ix B. Terminology This appendix summarises various acronyms and terminology
>                                 ^^^^^^^^^^
Do not mix variants of the same word ("summarise" and "summarize") within a
single text.

Document references draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-17, but -18 is the latest
available revision.

These URLs in the document can probably be converted to HTTPS:
 * http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/AFI/001_099/002/01.01.01_60/gs_afi002v010101p.pdf