Comments on LDM-612:
community_brokers.tex, line 81:
is there any plan to recompete broker slots during operations? How long will the project guarantee to provide an alert stream to the selected brokers for? Will brokers be monitored for quality of service during the operational era? All of these things can be specified by an MOU with the selected brokers, but it would seem fair to at least set some expectations here. (Please ignore, I found an answer to this one)
community_brokers.tex, line 100: what if no viable proposal for such a broker is received?
community_brokers.tex, line 191: LSO-011 hasn't been published, is still marked as draft, and the preferred version on Docushare (which isn't linked to) is meaningless. I think it's fine to cite it, but it would be wise to add a disclaimer here that it is not normative (“some possible data release scenarios are described....”).
components.tex, line 10: I believe that the standard term is “alternate standard visit” (rather than “alternative”; see LSR-REQ-0120, although I note the DM glossary is wrong). And I think this is a perfectly respectable term which doesn't deserve scare quotes!
components.tex, line 73: the text at this line is not new, but the comment re “five full streams” a couple of lines below is. I think (but am on a cell phone, so can't easily check) that the baseline is “five full streams”, and “10 Gbps” is just an implementation detail.
data_rights.tex, line 3: LDO-13 is still very much in draft, and, indeed, the version cited is stamped “DRAFT; NOT YET APPROVED”. Please retain the “which is in development at this writing” caveat (or add something equivalent).