Re: draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05

Ignacio,
Lots of thanks for a very detailed review.

I agree with you that the document is ready for the WG LC, since most of the comments are editorial and can be done after the LC.

I would appreciate  your advice regarding split of the IANA Considerations section.

Regards,
        Sasha

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ignacio Goyret [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:00 PM
> To: Alexander Vainshtein
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: draft-ietf-l2tpext-tdm-05
>
> Hi Sasha,
> This last rev has been a big improvement. Thanks for your work!
>
> I have just a few more editorial changes:
>
> * Section 2, last paragraph (page 3)
>
> OLD: There are two new AVPs for the Session Connection Messages.
>                                             ^^^^^^^^^^ ^
> NEW: There are two new AVPs for the Session Management messages.
>                                             ^^^^^^^^^^ ^
>
> * Section 2.1, page 4:
>
> OLD:
>      a) The specified value MUST be an integer multiple of
>         number of DS0 channels in the corresponding attachment
>         circuit.
> NEW:
>      a) The specified value MUST be an integer multiple of the
>                                                            ^^^
>         number of DS0 channels in the corresponding attachment
>         circuit.
>
> * Section 2.2, page 5:
> OLD:  PT is the payload type expected in the RTP header.
> Value of zero
>                                                           ^
> NEW:  PT is the payload type expected in the RTP header.  A
> value of zero
>                                                           ^^^
>
> * Section 3, 2nd bullet point under "CESoPSN basic" (page 7):
>
>    s/teh/the/
>
> * IANA Considerations:
>   Just to make it clear to everyone involved, you may want to separate
>   the lonely return code from the list of return/error codes and make
>   two lists: a return code list (one item) and an error code
> list (with
>   the 5 items).
>
> The text looks reasonably solid to me, so I believe we are ready
> for WGLC.
>
> Thanks again for the effort that you have put into this work.
>
> Cheers,
> -Ignacio
>
>