Terminology for Benchmarking Network-layer Traffic Control Mechanisms
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 13 and is now closed.
(David Kessens) Yes
(Jari Arkko) No Objection
Comment (2006-05-25 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
Nits: s/[BR98]/[Br98]/ Terms DUT and SUT should be opened up on first occurrence.
(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection
(Lars Eggert) No Objection
(Russ Housley) (was Discuss) No Objection
(Cullen Jennings) No Objection
(Dan Romascanu) No Objection
Comment (2006-05-24 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
1. The last paragrah in the introduction section seems to be unrelated with the first three paragraphs. It mentions 'one of these two mechanisms' without the rest of the section defining what mechanisms are being discussed. 2. There is a need for an abbreviations section in order to ease readability 3. Sections 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 220.127.116.11 to 18.104.22.168, 22.214.171.124 to 126.96.36.199 define 'seconds' as units for latency and jitter. This does not seem to be granular enough and thus conflicts with Section 3.8 in RFC 1224 which requires that time units for latency for example be 'Time with fine enough units to distinguish between two events'.
(Mark Townsley) No Objection
Magnus Westerlund No Objection
Comment (2006-05-23 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
DUT/SUT are not spelled out at their first usage or in a abbrevations chapter. In general I think the document could become more readable if one actually wrote out abbrevations on their first usage. Even if they are obvious for a person skilled in the field.