Thanks for the review and follow up! > Am 24.07.2017 um 23:02 schrieb Matthew Miller > <[email protected]>: > > Reviewer: Matthew Miller > Review result: Ready with Issues > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-ietf-curdle-ssh-ext-info-10 > Reviewer: Matthew Miller > Review Date: 2017-07-24 > IETF LC End Date: 2017-07-30 > IESG Telechat date: N/A > > Summary: > > This document is ready with an issue. > > I found this document very coherent and easy to follow. > > Major issues: > > Minor issues: > > My only issue borders on nit, but sided with nit as I can see it > potentially causing confusion for an implementer in the future. > > Section 2.5. "Interpretation of Extension Names and Values" explicitly > states in the second paragraph a condition where the relative order of > extension-names in an EXT_INFO message is irrelevant. However, the rest > of the section seems to imply to me that relative order is not important; > so to explicitly call out a scenario seems to imply that relative order > *is* relevant/important, sometimes. If relative order is expected to be > important most of the time, I think it helpful to explicitly state that > and give a rationale for it. > > Nits/editorial comments: > > * RFC 5226 is referenced by this document, but is obsoleted by RFC 8126. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
