Dan - Thanx for the review. I have no objection to your suggestion. I would hope this change can be done by the RFC Editor.
Les > -----Original Message----- > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:droma...@avaya.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 5:35 AM > To: gen-art@ietf.org > Cc: draft-ietf-isis-rfc1142-to-historic....@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-isis-rfc1142-to-historic-00 > > > 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-ietf-isis-rfc1142-to-historic-00 > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review Date: 12/17/13 > IETF LC End Date: 12/24/13 > IESG Telechat date: > > Summary: Ready > > Major issues: > > Minor issues: > > It may be more cautious refer to the 'latest available' version of the IS-IS > standard as we cannot be completely sure that the Second Edition will also be > the very last one. Suggested change in Section 1: > > OLD: > > All references to IS-IS should be to ISO/IEC 10589:2002, Second > Edition and RFC 1142 is only of historic interest. > > NEW: > > All references to IS-IS should be to the latest edition of the IS-IS > standard (currently ISO/IEC 10589:2002, Second > Edition) and RFC 1142 is only of historic interest. > > Nits/editorial comments: > > > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
