Adding Michelle Gower as a reviewer to see if I covered essential needs.

Note that an RFC will be issued for this LDM, so the review is only preliminary, not final correctness or acceptance.

Unclear what the action item means.    Based upon the text changes in LDM-148, assuming it meant adding availability requirements for enclaves.    Reviewed text changes limited to that scope (i.e., not checking for non-availability SLA items or commenting on previously existing text).    Individual comments appear in github. 
 
High level comment:   Some services fulfill multiple roles in with different availability requirements (i.e., depend upon components of other enclaves).   So, the text tends to take side-trips to cover the multiple uses (and explain the availability differences).   Not sure how to make this better.    Maybe there are online and offline versions of a service and each should only appear in the appropriate enclave?   Separate discussion of the (reusable) services from discussions of enclaves? 

Added clarifications based on review comments, merged to master.  Will submit an RFC.