Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-info, general-constraint-encode, rwa-wson-encode, gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te, wson-signal-compatibility-ospf, wson-signaling

Authors,
	I have some general comments on these documents as a set, i.e., that
apply to all documents.  I also have document specific comments that
I'll send separately.

Note that I'm the document shepherd, see RFC 4858 for more information.

General comments:

- Broken cross references:  The documents have a lot of pointers to each
other, many of which are broken and need to be fixed.  For example (and
NOT the only one!) the signaling document has:
   <RBInformation> is defined in Section 4.1 of [WSON-Encode].

1. While the section reference is correct (but check others as this
isn't always the case), there is no <RBInformation> defined in the
document.  The problem here is inconsistent usage of BNF and expanded
style names.  I think it's fine to use both, e.g., <RBInformation> and
Resource Block Information, but there needs to be consistent cross
referencing and definitions.  This problem also exists within drafts too.

2. As above, please verify cross referenced section numbers

- It looks like there are still some vestigial references to "ingress"
and "egress" (noted as replaced by "input" and "output").  This also
shows in abbreviations where 'E' is used rather than 'O'.

- In a number of documents s/GPID/G-PID

- Revision history should be removed at this point.

- Please ensure abbreviations are expanded on first use. See
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt for
additional guidance.

- Your terminology sections include terms that are only used in this
section.  This does not make sense.  The terminology section also
duplicates what is already in RFC6163. I suggest eliminating such
sections and adding references to RFC6163 if/where needed.

- Please double check that there are no idnits

- Please update any references that are now RFCs, e.g., RBNF

- A general discussion on security in GMPLS networks can be found in
RFC5920.  I suggest adding an informative reference in your security
sections.

Thanks,
Lou

On 10/1/2013 12:34 PM, Lou Berger wrote:
> All,
> 
> This mail begins working group last call on the WSON documents.  As
> there are 6 documents in this set, the last call will be three weeks.
> The documents included in the last call are:
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-18
> (Informational, IPR Disclosed)
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-11
> (Standards Track, IPR Disclosed)
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode-21
> (Standards Track)
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-05
> (Standards Track, IPR Disclosed)
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-compatibility-ospf-12
> (Standards Track, IPR Disclosed)
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling-06 (Standards
> Track) Also has one open issue that will need to be resolved as part of
> LC, see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/trac/ticket/52.
> 
> This working group last call ends on October 22.  Comments should be
> sent to the CCAMP mailing list.  Please remember to include the
> technical basis for any comments.
> 
> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is
> ready for publication", are welcome!
> 
> Please note that we're still missing some IPR statements.  Any
> forthcoming publication request will be delayed by late IPR
> statements/disclosures.
> 
> 
> Thank you,
> Lou (and Deborah)
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
> 
> 
> 
> 