Hi, thank you for the review. Elwyn, can you fix those editorial comments and resubmit.
Regards, Jukka On 30.3.2010 12:20, Miguel A. Garcia 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-nsis-ext-06.txt Reviewer: Miguel Garcia <[email protected]> Review Date: 30-March-2010 IETF LC End Date: 31-March-2010 Summary: The document is ready for publication as an Informational RFC. Nits/editorial comments: The document is well written, and I bet the community highly appreciates this kind of documents. I have a couple of minor comments and nits. - The texs in Section 8.2 reads: In these subsections, references to document sections refer to the GIST specification [I-D.ietf-nsis-ntlp]. I must say that I do not get the point. Sections 8.2.1, 8.2.2, and so on, make reference to Section x, and Section, and the reader has to add "of the GIST specification [ref]". This makes the subsections not self contained. Besides, as a reader, I need to have a clear understanding whether I have finished reading Section 8.2 and its subsections, because they have this implicit references to the GIST specification, or make sure that I am outside Section 8.2 where the explicit references are back. I _highly_ recommend the authors to use a few more words and make explicit references to a document, which means reference in subsections of Section 8.2 would read "See Section 3.8 of the GIST specification [ref]". - I encourage the authors to review the number of the sections pointed in the GIST specification. I think some of the might have changed. For example, in Section 8.2.1 of this draft, the text in the first paragraph says: Currently only two message routing methods are supported (Path- coupled MRM and Loose-End MRM), but further MRMs may be defined in the future. See Section 3.8. One possible additional MRM under Section 3.8 of the GIST specification deals with signaling applications, which I believe is not what you want to refer to. I think the reference should be towards Section 3.3. - Section 1, last paragraph, the sentence has double verb and makes no senses: This document gives an overview of the NSIS framework and protocol suite is at the time of writing (2009) ^^^^ Probably it should read: This document gives an overview of the NSIS framework and protocol suite at the time of writing (2009) - Section 4, collection of bullet points, 5th bullet point. The text reads: o Session binding, session X can be valid only if session Y is too Probably the word "valid" is missing: o Session binding, session X can be valid only if session Y is valid too /Miguel
<<attachment: jukka_manner.vcf>>
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
