Re: Second WGLC: draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology and methodology

"Lucien Avramov (lavramov)" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.bmwg
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Al,

Thank you!

Interesting, IDNITS use to give me no errors. I will wait a few days to 
see if there are new comments on the list to incorporate also and then 
will post updated version taking care of IDNITS.

Lucien


On 9/13/16 12:12 PM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote:
> Hi Lucien and Jacob,
>
> I ran IDNITS on your drafts, unfortunately it has lots
> of suggestions. Please take care of these in your next
> round of edits.
>
> thanks,
> Al
> bmwg co-chair
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> idnits 2.14.01  /var/www/.idnits
>
> tmp/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-02.txt:
>
>    Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see
>    http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info):
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>       No issues found here.
>
>    Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt:
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>       No issues found here.
>
>    Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist :
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section.
>
>    ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section.  (See Section
>       2.2 of http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case
>       when there are no actions for IANA.)
>
>    ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one
>       being 10 characters in excess of 72.
>
>
>    Miscellaneous warnings:
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not
>       match the current year
>
>    == Line 90 has weird spacing: '...contain  many-...'
>
>    -- Couldn't find a document date in the document -- date freshness check
>       skipped.
>
>
>    Checking references for intended status: Informational
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: 'DUT' on line 97
>
>    == Missing Reference: '6' is mentioned on line 612, but not defined
>
>    -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: 'SoC' on line 226
>
>    == Unused Reference: '1' is defined on line 593, but no explicit reference
>       was found in the text
>
>    == Unused Reference: '2' is defined on line 596, but no explicit reference
>       was found in the text
>
>    == Unused Reference: '3' is defined on line 601, but no explicit reference
>       was found in the text
>
>    == Unused Reference: '4' is defined on line 604, but no explicit reference
>       was found in the text
>
>    == Unused Reference: '5' is defined on line 607, but no explicit reference
>       was found in the text
>
>
>       Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 8 warnings (==), 3 comments (--).
>
>       Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about
>       the items above.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> idnits 2.14.01  /var/www/.idnits
>
> tmp/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology-05.txt:
>
>    Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see
>    http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info):
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>       No issues found here.
>
>    Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt:
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>       No issues found here.
>
>    Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist :
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section.
>
>    ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section.  (See Section
>       2.2 of http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case
>       when there are no actions for IANA.)
>
>    ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one
>       being 10 characters in excess of 72.
>
>    ** There are 6 instances of lines with control characters in the document.
>
>
>    Miscellaneous warnings:
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not
>       match the current year
>
>    == Line 173 has weird spacing: '...  is to  refer...'
>
>    == Line 597 has weird spacing: '... S / Ft  bytes...'
>
>    == Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL', 'SHOULD',
>       or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119.  Please
>       use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is what you
>       mean).
>
>       Found 'MUST not' in this paragraph:
>
>       3) LIFO MUST not be used, because it subtracts the latency of the
>       packet; unlike all the other methods.
>
>    -- Couldn't find a document date in the document -- date freshness check
>       skipped.
>
>
>    Checking references for intended status: Informational
>    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    == Missing Reference: '6' is mentioned on line 126, but not defined
>
>    == Missing Reference: '5' is mentioned on line 650, but not defined
>
>    == Unused Reference: '1' is defined on line 634, but no explicit reference
>       was found in the text
>
>    == Unused Reference: '2' is defined on line 637, but no explicit reference
>       was found in the text
>
>    == Unused Reference: '3' is defined on line 642, but no explicit reference
>       was found in the text
>
>    == Unused Reference: '4' is defined on line 645, but no explicit reference
>       was found in the text
>
>
>       Summary: 4 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 10 warnings (==), 1 comment (--).
>
>       Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about
>       the items above.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: bmwg [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of MORTON, ALFRED C
>> (AL)
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 2:43 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: [bmwg] Second WGLC: draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology and
>> methodology
>>
>> *** Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T ***.
>> Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more
>> information.
>>
>> BMWG:
>>
>> A WG Last Call period for the Internet-Drafts on
>> Data Center Benchmarking Terminology and Methodology:
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology-05
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-02
>>
>> will be open from 13 September 2016 through 27 September 2016.
>>
>> The first WGLC closed on 8 April 2016 with comments.
>>
>> These drafts are continuing the BMWG Last Call Process. See
>> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bmwg/current/msg00846.html
>>
>> Please read and express your opinion on whether or not these
>> Internet-Drafts should be forwarded to the Area Directors for
>> publication as Informational RFCs.  Send your comments
>> to this list or to the co-chairs [email protected] and
>> [email protected]
>>
>> for the co-chairs,
>> Al
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bmwg mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> bmwg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.