Thanks, Gonzallo. The first three comments seem to be in place, and easy to fix by Notes to the RFC Editor.
The last issue will be solved by the formatting of the document by the RFC Editor. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: Gonzalo Camarillo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 3:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [email protected] > Subject: Gen-art review of draft-ietf-capwap-threat-analysis-04.txt > > Hi, > > 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. > > > Draft: draft-ietf-capwap-threat-analysis-04.txt > Reviewer: Gonzalo Camarillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Review Date: 25 September 2008 > > Summary: > > This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits > that should be fixed before publication. > > > Comments: > > The acronym CAPWAP should be expanded in the title of the draft. > > The draft uses capitalized RFC 2119 language without > referencing RFC 2119. Given that this is an informational > document, it may be OK to do so, but this is something the AD > should decide. > > RFC 4017 is defined as an Informative Reference but is not > used anywhere in the text. > > The ID Nits tool complains about a too long line (i.e., > longer than 72 characters). > > > Thanks, > > Gonzalo > > > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
