Subject: [apps-discuss] Applications Area Directorate review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-byte-pkt-congest-09

From: Tim Bray <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:47:54 -0700

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for this
draft (for background on appsdir, please see
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate).

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-tsvwg-byte-pkt-congest-09
Title: Byte and Packet Congestion Notification
Reviewer: Tim Bray
Review Date: March 8, 2013

I lack expertise in the subject matter, so can only comment on the
exposition and clarity.  Since I, not a subject-matter expert, think I
understood the analysis, and actually enjoyed reading it. I believe this
draft is pretty well ready for publication, assuming subject matter experts
agree with its analysis and conclusions.

Major issues: None
Minor issues: None

Nits:

1. Introduction
I had a little trouble parsing “... how we should correctly scale
congestion control functions with packet size...” I guess “scale A with B”
is a little bit nonstandard grammar. Do you mean “scale A as a function of
B” or “scale A as B increases” or what?

s/notifying congestion/notifying of congestion/

s/notifies its level of congestion/notifies of its level of congestion/

s/byte-size/size/ in general, right?  How else would one measure size?

Might it be smart, in the spirit of tl;dr, to move Section 8 to near the
front of the document?   For example, the answers “it depends”, “no”, and
“yes”, are too far from the questions.