Dear Miguel, Thanks for the comments. Please find my answers inline.
On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 13:45:14 +0300 Miguel Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) >reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see >http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). > >Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments >you may receive. > > >Document: draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-07.txt >Reviewer: Miguel Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Review Date: 2007-06-04 >IETF LC End Date: 2007-06-05 > >Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational RFC. > >Comments: The document is well written and easy to understand. I just >have a few nits. > > >Nits: >- Section 1, second paragraph. The last sentence in this paragraph spans >across 6 lines and lacks readability. It should be improved. OK. This is a pure wording modification. Here is my proposed modification (I took the freedom to expand on the mentioned use case). === OLD === Scenarios illustrated in [6] demonstrate that providing a permanent access to mobile networks such as vehicles typically require the use of several interfaces and technologies since the mobile network may be moving in distant geographical locations where different access technologies are provided and governed by distinct access control policies. === NEW === Scenarios illustrated in [6] demonstrate that providing a permanent access to mobile networks typically require the use of several interfaces and technologies. For example, this is particularly useful for ITS (Intelligent Transport Systems) applications since vehicles are moving across distant geographical locations. Access would be provided through different access technologies (e.g. Wimax, Wifi, 3G) and through different access operators (e.g. cellular operator, motorway operator, gas stations). >- Section 1, first set of bullet points. There seems to be strange >characters at the end of a sentence, or is it an arrow? > > o multiple global prefixes are available in the mobile network.--> This is a remaining xml typo. "-->" to be removed. >- Acronyms: The acronym MNP is first used in Section 1, 5th paragraph. >However, it is not expanded there, but it should. Expand the acronym AR >in Figure 1. Expadn W-PAN in Example 2 in Section 3.1. Note MNP is defined in the NEMO Terminology doc which is mentioned in the first sentence of the introduction. Do you think it's necessary to mention the documents each time a new term is introduced ? Or, we may add a "Terminology" section where we would explicitly say that MR, MNP, etc are mentioned in these docs. OK for W-PAN to be expanded to "Wireless Personal Area Network". >- Double reference. In Section 4.1 there is a double cross reference to >reference [8]. I assume this is an error: > > "These are also discussed in [8] and [8] by the Shim6 WG. " > ^^^ ^^^ OK, these were to separate drafts that where later merged into a single Shim6 doc. >- Suggestion: add a informative reference to DHCPv6 in the last sentence >of Section 2. OK. >- IDnits reports a number of outdated references, probably due to new >updates while this document was frozen and progressing in the process. >It also reports some Down references, but they are not applicable, >because idnits considers the intended status is "Proposed Standard" >rather than Informational. OK, and thanks again for reading the doc. Regards, Thierry _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
