[Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc-02

Meral Shirazipour <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com> Mon, 01 October 2012 19:08 UTC

Return-Path: <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C10E321F8B0C for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Oct 2012 12:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x1-vLl0nXd35 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Oct 2012 12:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE43C21F8B0B for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Oct 2012 12:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id q91JFTwO017676; Mon, 1 Oct 2012 14:15:43 -0500
Received: from EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.2.164]) by eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) with mapi; Mon, 1 Oct 2012 15:08:37 -0400
From: Meral Shirazipour <meral.shirazipour@ericsson.com>
To: "draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc-all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc-all@tools.ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 15:08:35 -0400
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc-02
Thread-Index: Ac2gCCUIGq62/fwLSD2TBMU6tfh9hw==
Message-ID: <25DC600D0CC1F2479C7053ADEB93004E6DF62A0166@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc-02
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 19:08:41 -0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq> .

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc-02
Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review Date: 2012-10-01
IETF LC End Date: 2012-10-01
IESG Telechat date: NA


Summary:
This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard track RFC, but I have some comments.

Nits/editorial comments:
[Page 3], Section 1, "ALC [RFC5775]", please spell out ALC: "Asynchronous Layered Coding (ALC)"

[Page 3], Section 1, "NORM [RFC5740]", please spell out NORM: "NACK-Oriented Reliable Multicast (NORM)"

[Page 4], line 3, ALU is first used, please spell out: "Application Data Unit (ADU)", or move section "3.3 Abbreviations" to the beginning.

[Page 4], Section "3.1.  Definitions", after the ":" for all definitions, please start with capital letters or with lower case (for consistency please choose one)

[Page 5], for "ADU Block", it would clearer to have Flow ID, Length and Padding fields in parenthesis next to F[], L[], and Pad[] respectively.

[Page 5], after "FEC Framework Configuration Information" please add "(FFCI)".

[Page 5], section 4.1, "G MUST be equal..", please define G in section "3.2.  Notations".

[Page 9], last sentence, "Each ADUI contributes to exactly one source symbol to the source block.", it is clearer to say "...of the source block."

[Page 15], Section 6.1.1, "(e.g., before versus after FEC protection, and within the end-system versus in a middlebox)", please rephrase if possible, this is not very clear.

[Page 19], reference [SIMPLE_RS] is now at version 03.

[Page 19], reference [RFC5053]: title is missing "for Object Delivery"

-Overall for clarity, please adapt one method for spelling out acronyms (either in one section in intro, or throughout the text as they are first used; but not both).
-Overall for clarity, some line feed would be useful in section 5.  


Best Regards,
Meral

---
Meral Shirazipour
Ericsson Research
www.ericsson.com