Draft:  draft-ietf-pim-anycast-rp-04.txt
Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern [joel@stevecrocker.com]
Review Date: Saturday 12/10/2005 2:23 PM CST
LC Date: 11/17/2005

Summary: This document is ready for publication as a proposed standard.
There are some minor comments that the AD can review to decide if they are 
worth passing on to the working group.   (More significant comments are 
sent to authors, chairs, and WG list, but this is minor enough not to be 
worth risking confusion.)

minor:
     I am not sure calling section 2.0 "Requirements" is a good use of 
naming.  Section 2 is a really useful section.  It describes what you are 
trying to do nicely and clearly.  But "requirements" it 
isn't.  "Overview"would do nicely as a title.

     It seems to require interesting management control to achieve the 
conditions required to mix non-supporting RPs into this, as described in 
section 4.0.  I understand that technically, as long as the non-supporting 
RP has only receivers, it works.  But a little more explication as to when 
/ how this can be ensured might be appropriate.

     Isn't it a bit odd for the authors to thank themselves?  The work they 
are acknowledging is worth noting (the authors did two prototypes of the 
draft.)  But different wording might be nice.