Hi, 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. Draft: draft-ietf-kitten-rfc2853bis-05.txt Reviewer: Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camari...@ericsson.com> Review Date: 02 June 2009 Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a PS RFC. Comments: In general, Abstracts should not contain references. While referencing RFC 2853 to explain that this document obsoletes it is probably OK, I would remove the rest of the references from the Abstract. The naming of the references is not consistent. Some of them are named [RFCxxxx] but not all of them. In Section 4, a ':' to introduce the definition of each optional service would probably make the text clearer (e.g., Mutual Authentication: in addition...) The word "Section" should be capitalized when referring to a specific section (e.g., in Section 8). The ID nits tool makes a few observations about boilerplates. The authors should make sure that the boilerplates in the draft are OK. http://tools.ietf.org/idnits?url=http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-kitten-rfc2853bis-05.txt Also, the ID tools complains about 4 instances of lines with non-RFC2606-compliant FQDNs but does not identify them. Thanks, Gonzalo _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
