Thank you very much for the review, Suresh. I followed your discussion with Martin, and the conclusions seem correct to me. But I don't think we should approve the draft until the -08 appears. Martin?
Jari On Jun 10, 2013, at 2:15 PM, Suresh Krishnan <[email protected]> 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 wait for direction from your document shepherd > or AD before posting a new version of the draft. > > Document: draft-ietf-geopriv-held-measurements-07.txt > Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan > Review Date: 2013/06/10 > IESG Telechat date: 2013/06/13 > > > Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a Proposed > Standard, but I had a few minor comments as identified > in my last call review dated 2013/05/08. The authors had agreed to fix > the following issues but I have not seen an updated draft yet. > > Minor > ===== > > * Section 5.2 > > - The Interface-Id option is the DHCPv6 equivalent of the circuit > identifier defined in RFC3046. Please add a reference to Section 22.18 > of RFC3315 that describes this option. > > - Is there any specific reason that the giaddr is being specified using > the IPv4-mapped IPv6 address format? From my reading giaddr is of type > bt:ipAddressType and it allows specification of both IPv4 and IPv6 > addresses natively. > > * Section 8.7 Page 53 > > I think there may be an off-by-one error here. > > <xs:maxInclusive value="268435456"/> > > Shouldn't this be > > <xs:maxInclusive value="268435455"/> > > so that the largest value will fit in 28 bits? > > Thanks > Suresh > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
