Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-mboned-driad-amt-discovery-09
Dan Romascanu <[email protected]> Tue, 3 Dec 2019 22:31:37 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mboned,gmane.ietf.gen-art |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAFgnS4XF8qHuXDCWtAYv7QMdn=RaDdgE2OPO3P+FkO3wPe+mag@mail.gmail.com> |
--===============8242801895366532653== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ea70f90598d295b2" --000000000000ea70f90598d295b2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Jake, Thanks for addressing these issues. No further comments. Regards, Dan On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 6:57 PM Holland, Jake <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > =EF=BB=BFOn 2019-11-28, 07:22, "Dan Romascanu via Datatracker" <noreply@i= etf.org> > wrote: > > Nits/editorial comments: > > 1. The reading of 2.4.1 and 2.4.3 seemed to me confusing. 2.4.1 speaks > about > > 'establishing' a connection while 2.4.3 speaks about 'completing' a > connection. > > Are the two terms equivalent? If so, I would prefer to use only one of > them, if > > not, some more clarification is necessary. > > Good point, thanks. I've provisionally changed my local copy to use > "established", which I think addresses this comment: > > OLD: > o An AMT connection is completed successfully when the gateway > receives from a newly discovered relay a valid Membership Query > > NEW: > o An AMT connection is established successfully when the gateway > receives from a newly discovered relay a valid Membership Query > > > 2. The term 'tier 3 ISP' used in Section 3.1.1 is an 'industry term' > that needs > > to be defined, either by reference or in text. > > I've removed the "Tier 3" and expanded the first use to "Internet Service > Provider" (2nd use, not including section title). I think the "Tier 3" > was non-essential. > > OLD: > 3.1.1. Tier 3 ISP > > One example of a receiving network is an ISP that offers multicast > ingest services to its subscribers, illustrated in Figure 3. > > NEW: > 3.1.1. Internet Service Provider > > One example of a receiving network is an Internet Service Provider > (ISP) that offers multicast ingest services to its subscribers, > illustrated in Figure 3. > > Thanks for pointing out the nits, and please let me know if there's > anything else you think needs changing. > > Thanks and regards, > Jake > > > --000000000000ea70f90598d295b2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Hi Jake,</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for addressi= ng these issues. <br></div><div><br></div><div>No further comments. <br></d= iv><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Dan</div><div><br>= </div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_= attr">On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 6:57 PM Holland, Jake <<a href=3D"mailto:jh= [email protected]">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote = class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px sol= id rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Hi Dan,<br> <br> =EF=BB=BFOn 2019-11-28, 07:22, "Dan Romascanu via Datatracker" &l= t;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a= >> wrote:<br> > Nits/editorial comments:<br> > 1. The reading of 2.4.1 and 2.4.3 seemed to me confusing. 2.4.1 speaks= about<br> > 'establishing' a connection while 2.4.3 speaks about 'comp= leting' a connection.<br> > Are the two terms equivalent? If so, I would prefer to use only one of= them, if<br> > not, some more clarification is necessary.<br> <br> Good point, thanks.=C2=A0 I've provisionally changed my local copy to u= se<br> "established", which I think addresses this comment:<br> <br> OLD:<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0o=C2=A0 An AMT connection is completed successfully when the g= ateway<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 receives from a newly discovered relay a valid Members= hip Query<br> <br> NEW:<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0o=C2=A0 An AMT connection is established successfully when the= gateway<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 receives from a newly discovered relay a valid Members= hip Query<br> <br> > 2. The term 'tier 3 ISP' used in Section 3.1.1 is an 'indu= stry term' that needs<br> > to be defined, either by reference or in text.<br> <br> I've removed the "Tier 3" and expanded the first use to "= ;Internet Service<br> Provider" (2nd use, not including section title).=C2=A0 I think the &q= uot;Tier 3"<br> was non-essential.<br> <br> OLD:<br> 3.1.1.=C2=A0 Tier 3 ISP<br> <br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0One example of a receiving network is an ISP that offers multi= cast<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0ingest services to its subscribers, illustrated in Figure 3.<b= r> <br> NEW:<br> 3.1.1.=C2=A0 Internet Service Provider<br> <br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0One example of a receiving network is an Internet Service Prov= ider<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0(ISP) that offers multicast ingest services to its subscribers= ,<br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0illustrated in Figure 3.<br> <br> Thanks for pointing out the nits, and please let me know if there's<br> anything else you think needs changing.<br> <br> Thanks and regards,<br> Jake<br> <br> <br> </blockquote></div> --000000000000ea70f90598d295b2-- --===============8242801895366532653== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ MBONED mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned --===============8242801895366532653==--