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-isis-rfc2763bis-00.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 2008-06-25 IETF LC End Date: 2008-06-23 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Almost Ready Comments: I have some editorial concerns: - first, as it is an update it should be fine to provided a temporary (i.e., marked as to be removed before publication) section about the changes from the RFC 2763. This would refrain me to raise concerns shared by the RFC 2763... - Copyright page 1: if (and *only* if) you issue a new version don't forget to update the year. - Abstract page 2: put "Abstract" from center to left - 1 page 4: a reference for IS-IS should be fine. And please add a statement about the use of IS-IS as an IP routing protocol (or I'll ask why you don't discuss about X.500 in place of DNS :-). - 1 page 4: the abbrev LSP should be introduced. - 2 page 5: there is a DNS RR for CLNS NSAPs, it is the NSAP RR. So I propose to replace "A and PTR" by a text like "address and reverse". - 2 page 5: CLNS and TLV abbrevs should be introduced, and IMHO before section 2. - 3 page 5: the FQDN (Fully Qualified Domain Name) abbrev should be introduced. BTW the "subset of the FQDN" doesn't make sense, it is just a Domain Name. - 3 page 5: you have to be more accurate about the representation of DNs, obviously you'd like the textual representation (not the DNS "on wire" one with name compression, wouldn't you?) - 4 page 6: it's -> its - 6 page 6: Others to be provided.... So provide some? - 8.2 page 9: RFC 2119 should be normative. Regards [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
