Apologies for the multiple copies. Adding RTG Dir.   Matthew   From: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" Date: Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 11:22 To: "draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay at tools.ietf.org" Cc: "rtgwg-chairs at tools.ietf.org" , "rtgwg at ietf.org" Subject: Rtg Area Directorate QA review of draft-ietf-rtwg-uloop-delay-02.txt   Authors,   I have been asked to do a Routing Area Directorate QA review of draft-ietf-rtwg-uloop-delay-02.txt       Summary:   The rationale for this document is clear and the mechanism seems reasonably straight forward. However, one major comment that I have is that the English grammar is poor in some sections, and it is missing normal English articles in some places (a, an, the,…), making it hard to read. I would suggest that the authors go through the draft with a native English speaker to help resolve these nits.     Comments:   Minor Issues:   Section 2.1 Fast reroute unefficiency s/unefficiency/inefficiency   Section 4.1 Definitions, 2nd bullet: …by incrementing the timer vape when the IGP is instable. s/instable/unstable   4.3 Local Events The draft states that it assumes that only a single link failure has been seen by the IGP area. However, its not clear how you distinguish a single local failure from consecutive (non-simultaneous) failure that occurs within a given short timespan e.g. during the initial re-convergence period. It would help to clarify this.   Regards   Matthew