I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-sidr-cp-16.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 20110224
IETF LC End Date: 20110221
IESG Telechat date: unknown
Summary: Ready
Major issues: None
Minor issues: None
Nits/editorial comments:
- the document uses RFC{[wxyz]}4 as references in place of short
titles of references, this is not good because:
- it makes the reference hard to follow, i.e., the reader has
to solve the indirection each time
- it strongly binds the document livetimes to references'
- 1 page 7: IMHO the document should clearly state it is about
public key certificates (vs attribute certificates)
- 1 page 7: in
"In the interest of keeping the document as short as
reasonable, a number of sections contained in the template are
^^^
were/have been?
omitted from this policy because they did not apply to this PKI."
^^^ do?
- 1.3.2 page 9: please check the 1.4.1 pointer
(could be 1.5.1?)
- 2.4 page 14 (and at other places): I learnt Latin so I have
a concern with 'data is' (as data is the plural of datum).
I leave this point to the RFC Editor who will fix or won't fix this...
- 3.2.2 page 16: bedescribed -> be described
- 3.2.4 page 16: please extend the SIA abbrev
(it is its first occurrence)
- 4.3.2 page 20:
"The means by which a subscriber is notified is defined..."
^^ are?
- 4.5.2 page 21: TA -> Trust Anchor (it is its only occurrence)
- 13 page 40 (many times): ," -> ",
(to conform to RFC standard style)
- Authors' Addresses: +1 (617) xxx is not in an E.123 format,
why not +1 617 xxx?
Regards
francis.dup...@fdupont.fr
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
