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-pwe3-pw-tc-mib-12.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 2007-11-06
IETF LC Date: 2007-11-09
IESG Telechat date: unknown
Summary: Ready
Comments:
- editorial (i.e., to be handled by the RFC editor) comments:
* 2 page 3:
in STD 58,[RFC2578], STD 58, [RFC2579] and STD 58, [RFC2580].
-> in STD 58 [RFC2578], [RFC2579] and [RFC2580].
* 3 page 3: RFC-2119 -> RFC 2119
* 4 page 5: i.e. -> i.e.,
* 4 page 7: the control word -> the control word (CW)
* 4 page 7: please use either C-bit or C bit but not both
* 4 page 8: I'd like to see the word reassembly, for instance:
the peer is not capable of fragmentation.
-> the peer is not capable of reassembly
and/or in the first statement fragmentation -> fragmentation/reassembly
* 6 page 9: the ----- is not aligned (tab expansion?)
- for AUTH48:
* please fix Thomas Nadeau address and E-mail
* please remove the Ph.D. in the Orly Nicklass name
- other points:
* I have no good MIB compiler ready but a MIB doctor review is in
the procedure for MIBs
* I don't know if the embedded E-mails in the MIB should be updated too
(IMHO they should)
* spell checker asks for manualy -> manually, cabability -> capability,
fargmenteation -> fragmentation (please leave them to the RFC editor
who has a far better spell checker than me for English :-)
Regards
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
