Subject: [mpls] Addressing comments on draft-ietf-mpls-psc-updates-03.txt

From: Eric Osborne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 16:20:48 -0400

Folks-

  I have posted draft-ietf-mpls-psc-updates-04.  It addresses the
gen-art comments as well as other feeback received on this list from
the v-03 last call.  I also shuffled things around so that the section
order made more sense.

  This draft elicited a comment and a warning from idnits.  I believe
they are both OK to disregard:

1)

  -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC6378, but the
     abstract doesn't seem to directly say this.  It does mention RFC6378
     though, so this could be OK.

It's pretty clear that the document updates rfc6378.

2)

  == Missing Reference: 'RFC-ietf-mpls-psc-updates-04' is mentioned on line
     412, but not defined

This is a self-reference which needs to be updated with the RFC number
for this draft.

  I expect this to be good to go, but given the amount of reshuffling
and new text I'd like to give folks one more shot at tweaking the
language.

The meat of the work is in section 2.2.  Adrian, Elwyn - this contains
the majority of the changes based on gen-art feedback and other
discussions on the list.  Please give this the once-over at your
convenience.

eric

---

From: Elwyn Davies <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 16:39:59 +0100

Hi, Eric.

I checked over the new version and it addresses my previous comments
just fine.  Thanks.

One trivial nit:
s2.3.2: s/processesed/processed/

I noted Adrian's point about draft-ietf-mpls-tp-psc-itu in the tracker
and I guess the suggested change is reasonable.

If you are updating the text you could also fix:
- The style is supposed to be 'RFC 6378' rather than RFC6378 outside of
reference anchors.
- Sort out the punctuations of 'i.e.,' : Currently there is one with no
comma (5, para 1), two with one comma and one with two commas (s6, para
10 - the quote from RFC 6378 where it has one comma); and of 'e.g.,' :
Currently one with no comma (s4.3, para 2).

I'll send an official telechat review when the review is scheduled.

Cheers,
Elwyn

On Mon, 2014-04-21 at 16:20 -0400, Eric Osborne wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: Eric Osborne <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 08:35:00 -0400

Hi Elwyn-

  Inline.

> I checked over the new version and it addresses my previous comments

Cool!

> s2.3.2: s/processesed/processed/

OK.

> and I guess the suggested change is reasonable.

I agree.

> - The style is supposed to be 'RFC 6378' rather than RFC6378 outside of

OK

> Currently one with no comma (s4.3, para 2).

Sorry, I thought I caught all of those.

> I'll send an official telechat review when the review is scheduled.

OK.
thanks!

eric