Francis Dupont writes:
> Document: draft-kivinen-ipsecme-oob-pubkey-11.txt
> Reviewer: Francis Dupont
> Review Date: 20150911
> IETF LC End Date: 20150923
> IESG Telechat date: unknown
>
> Summary: Ready
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
> - ToC page 2 and 6 page 6: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments
Hmmm:
~/ietf-mirror/rfc>fgrep -l Acknowledgements rfc*.txt | wc -l
2961
~/ietf-mirror/rfc>fgrep -l Acknowledgments rfc*.txt | wc -l
1998
So in the RFCs the version with middle "e" seems to be winning, i.e.
60% RFCs use that version. On the other hand there is 73 RFCs which
use both spellings... I think I will stick with the spelling I am used
to as both of them seems to be acceptable.
> - 1 page 3: IMHO the choice of the SubjectPublicKeyInfo format is
> the right one.
>
> - 3 page 4: is a a very -> is a very
Fixed.
> - A.1 page 8 and A.2 page 10: i.e. -> i.e.,
Fixed.
> - A pages 7 - 10: BTW I used your 2 examples to add new unit tests in
> an application crypto library so I can confirm the 2 SPKIs are correct.
Good to know. Thanks for testing them.
--
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
