Document: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-dppm-10.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 2009-11-28 IETF LC End Date: 2009-11-23 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Major issues: None Minor issues: too many authors in Authors' Addresses (see below) Nits/editorial comments: - the document is heavily cut & paste between sections. This makes it like a MIB document so I have a mixed opinion about whether it is a good thing: the document is very clear, each part stands by itself, but it is a bit long and certainly boring to read. - Abstract page 3: I prefer to get the LSP abbrev introducted (the Abstract should stand by itself and LSP is not stared by the RFC Editor as well known/doesn't need expansion) - TOC page 6: * extra space in 12. title * Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments - Introduction page 8: same concern about LSP (but in this case you can consider it was introduced in the document title) - 4.7 page 13 (and 5.7 page 16, 6.7 page 20, 7.7 page 24): (T2 -T1) -> (T2-T1) - 4.8 page 13 (and 5.8 page 17, 6.8 page 20, 7.8 page 25, 8.8 page 29): uppper -> upper - 6.6 page 20 (and 7.6 page 23): Thus, In practice -> Thus, in practice - 8.8 page 29: eg. -> e.g., - 12 page 39 (title): Bidirectional LSPs -> Bidirectional LSPs - 12.7.2.1 page 42 (first statement): multiple bidirec... -> Multiple bidirec... - 18 page 49 (title): Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments - Authors' Addresses: * add a space after a comma (',' -> ', ') * CN -> China (many!) * Telecommunicaiton -> Telecommunication? * you have too many authors, I suggest to keep the two editors and to put other authors in a "contributors section". Look at the RFC Editor site about how to do this. Regards Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr PS: spelling of Re[sS]erVation in RSVP is not uniform but this happened 12 years ago... too late to fix it.