IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [babel] Routing area directorate early (QA) review of draft-ietf-babel-applicability

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> Sun, 05 February 2017 17:19 UTC

Return-Path: <jch@irif.fr>
X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91F0D129483; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 09:19:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vk0L5G9_abau; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 09:19:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8C47129481; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 09:19:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/56228) with ESMTP id v15HJJSu012715; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 18:19:19 +0100
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6005ED79B6; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 18:19:19 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id YLJxOPiuU9hV; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 18:19:18 +0100 (CET)
Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DF0CD7A23; Sun, 5 Feb 2017 18:19:17 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2017 18:19:17 +0100
Message-ID: <87mve07dyi.wl-jch@irif.fr>
From: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>
To: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR0301MB22668B182167E8D7CD1F4E4A9D4A0@HE1PR0301MB2266.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <BY2PR0201MB1910F03312F1A6360AB6790884640@BY2PR0201MB1910.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <HE1PR0301MB22668B182167E8D7CD1F4E4A9D4A0@HE1PR0301MB2266.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Sun, 05 Feb 2017 18:19:19 +0100 (CET)
X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 58975E97.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 58975E97.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/<jch@irif.fr>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 58975E97.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/tlCPBZ2akckbmlTj9Y6k4Uwwy48>
Cc: rtg-ads@ietf.org, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>, "babel@ietf.org" <babel@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [babel] Routing area directorate early (QA) review of draft-ietf-babel-applicability
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <babel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/>
List-Post: <mailto:babel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2017 17:19:26 -0000

Dear Alexander, dear all,

I've read your review carefully, and you have convinced me that this
document is not ready for publication as an informational RFC.  I think
you make three very good points:

  (1) the introduction is lacking;
  (2) the deployments should, whenever possible, be described in more detail;
  (3) the usage of extensions should be stressed whenever applicable.

This is very useful feedback, for which I am grateful.

Donald -- do I need to do something in order to interrupt the last call?

Thanks to all for your help,

-- Juliusz

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email