I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

 

This document defines a new generalized SCSI field format for use by future specific technologies and Switching Capability types. The draft is well written, I believe it is ready for publication. Here is a few minor comments:

1.       Section 1, 2nd paragraph

s/in the the Switching Capability-specific information/ in the Switching Capability-specific information

2.       Section 6, 2nd paragraph

s/either the the "Generalized Multi-Protocol/ either the "Generalized Multi-Protocol

3.       Section 6, 2nd paragraphs said:

“IANA is requested to create and maintain a new registry, the

"Generalized SCSI (Switching Capability Specific Information) TLVs

Types" registry under either the the "Generalized Multi-Protocol

Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" registry or a new

"Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Routing

Parameters" registry, at their desecration.”

 

IANA may be offended if you use the word “desecration ”, I think you should use discretion instead, also not sure we should use plural form, suggest to change “at their desecration” into “at his discretion”.

 

Secondly, I believe if document author can make decision on whether requesting to add new registry under an existing registry or under a new registry, IANA workload will be relieved or they will be thrilled.:-) Anyway I leave this up to you.

 

-Qin