Hi,

  Thank you, that will be great.



Best,

Meral



From: Robert Cragie [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 2:02 PM
To: Meral Shirazipour
Cc: David McGrew; [email protected]; 
[email protected]
Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-mcgrew-tls-aes-ccm-ecc-07



The suggested reference is:

[SEP2] ZigBee Alliance, Inc. and HomePlug Powerline Alliance, Inc., "Smart 
Energy Profile 2 9 Application Protocol Standard", ZigBee Public Document 
13-0200-00, 2013.

Then perhaps reword:

"This draft is motivated by the considerations raised in the Zigbee Smart 
Energy 2.0 working group"

to something like:

"This draft is motivated by the considerations raised in the Zigbee Smart 
Energy 2.0 working group and specified in [SEP2]"

Robert

On 10/10/2013 16:32, Meral Shirazipour wrote:

   Hi,

     Thank you David.



   Best Regards,

   Meral



   From: David McGrew [mailto:[email protected]]
   Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 6:10 AM
   To: Meral Shirazipour
   Cc: 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>;
 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
   Subject: Re: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-mcgrew-tls-aes-ccm-ecc-07



   Hi Meral,

   many thanks for the review, more inline:

   On 10/10/2013 03:26 AM, Meral Shirazipour wrote:

      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-mcgrew-tls-aes-ccm-ecc-07

      Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour

      Review Date: 2013-10-10

      IETF LC End Date: 2013-10-10

      IESG Telechat date: NA





      Summary:

      This draft is ready to be published as Informational RFC but I do have 
some editorial comments.



      Nits/editorial comments:

      -[Page 4], is there a reason to use both "seq_num field" and 
"sequence_number field" ?


   looking at RFC 6655 suggests that the latter should be changed to match the 
former.





   -[Page 7], Section 7, Zigbee Smart Energy 2.0 working group, a reference 
would be useful since it is not an IETF WG.


   That is a good idea.   I've copied Robert Cragie, who should be able to 
suggest a good reference.

   David









   Best Regards,

   Meral



   ---

   Meral Shirazipour

   Ericsson

   Research

   www.ericsson.com<http://www.ericsson.com>





_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to