Authors, I would like to take these comments directly as instructions for the RFC Editor. If there's any objection, let me know.
Jari Vijay K. Gurbani kirjoitti: > 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 wait for direction from your document shepherd > or AD before posting a new version of the draft. > > Document: draft-ietf-mip4-radius-requirements-03.txt > Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani > Review Date: 15 Jun 2007 > IESG Telechat date: 21 Jun 2007 > > Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational. > Three nits: > > 1) Section 1: s/[RFC3957] all based/[RFC3957], all based > (The comma improves readibility) > > 2) Section 3: s/reqiuired/required > > 3) Section 3.1: In the first and third bullet item, it appears > appropriate that the word "required" be upper-cased to denote its > use as a normative declaration. More so since bullet item two > contains the word "MUST" in normative fashion. I believe that > the authors are making a normative set of declarations for the > goals, so it appears uneven to have a MUST in the second bullet > item and not a pair of REQUIREDs in the other two bullets. > > Thanks, > > - vijay _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
