--- 1/draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr-05.txt	2007-10-30 17:12:06.000000000 +0100
+++ 2/draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr-06.txt	2007-10-30 17:12:06.000000000 +0100
@@ -1,20 +1,20 @@
 
 TSVWG                                                            K. Chan
 Internet-Draft                                                J. Babiarz
 Intended status: Informational                                    Nortel
-Expires: April 18, 2008                                         F. Baker
+Expires: May 2, 2008                                            F. Baker
                                                            Cisco Systems
-                                                        October 16, 2007
+                                                        October 30, 2007
 
                 Aggregation of DiffServ Service Classes
-                draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr-05
+                draft-ietf-tsvwg-diffserv-class-aggr-06
 
 Status of this Memo
 
    By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
    applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
    have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
    aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
 
    Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
    Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
@@ -25,21 +25,21 @@
    and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
    time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
 
    The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
    http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
 
    The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
    http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
 
-   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 18, 2008.
+   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 2, 2008.
 
 Copyright Notice
 
    Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
 
 Abstract
 
    In the core of a high capacity network, service differentiation may
    still be needed to support applications' utilization of the network.
    Applications with similar traffic characteristics and performance
@@ -165,22 +165,23 @@
 1.1.  Requirements Notation
 
    The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
    "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
    document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [1].
 
 2.  Terminology
 
    This document assumes the reader is familiar with the terms used in
    differentiated services.  This document provides the definitions for
-   new terms introduced by this document and referencing information for
-   existing none differentiated services terms defined in existing RFCs.
+   new terms introduced by this document and references information
+   defined in RFCs for existing terms not commonly used in
+   differentiated services.
 
    For new terms introduced by this document, we provide the definition
    here:
 
    o  Treatment Aggregate.  This term is defined as the aggregate of
       DiffServ service classes [3].  A Treatment Aggregate is concerned
       only with the forwarding treatment of the aggregated traffic,
       which may be marked with multiple DSCPs.  A Treatment Aggregate
       differs from Behavior Aggregate [2] and Traffic Aggregate [14],
       each of which indicate the aggregated traffic having a single