Hi David,

This will be good.

Thanks

Roni

 

From:

 Black, David [mailto:david.black at emc.com] 

Sent:

 Tuesday, March 01, 2016 5:26 PM

To:

 Roni Even; draft-ietf-tsvwg-circuit-breaker.all at tools.ietf.org

Cc:

 ietf at ietf.org; gen-art at ietf.org

Subject:

 RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-circuit-breaker-11

 

Hi Roni,

Looks like this was missed - sorry for the absence of a response.

WRT section 6.3.2 (now section 5.3.2) “persistently fails to deliver acceptable TDM service” is discussed in significant detail in Appendix A of the referenced [ID-ietf-pals-congcons] - it turns out to be a much longer discussion by comparison to section 6.3.1 (now section 5.3.1) that involves references to ITU-T G.826 and G.875.  I’d prefer not to reproduce or try to summarize that discussion in the tsvwg-circuit-breaker draft, but a sentence could be added to the end of that section to point the reader in the right direction, e.g.: “See Appendix A of [ID-ietf-pals-congcons] for further discussion.”

Thanks, --David

 

From:

 Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv at gmail.com] 

Sent:

 Monday, February 08, 2016 1:43 PM

To:

 draft-ietf-tsvwg-circuit-breaker.all at tools.ietf.org

Cc:

 ietf at ietf.org; gen-art at ietf.org

Subject:

 Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-circuit-breaker-11

 

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-tsvwg-circuit-breaker-11

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date:2016–2-8

IETF LC End Date: 2016–2-9

IESG Telechat date: 

 

Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a BCP RFC.

 

 

 

Major issues:

 

 

Minor issues:

 

In section 6.3.2 the proposal is “For that reason, the draft suggests that a managed circuit breaker that shuts down a PW when it persistently fails to deliver acceptable TDM service is a useful means for addressing these congestion concerns.” I accepted to see some definition of “persistently fails” at least similar to section 6.3.1. 

 

 

Nits/editorial comments: