> On Dec 16, 2015, at 10:47 AM 12/16/15, Alexey Melnikov > <alexey.melni...@isode.com> wrote: > > Hi Ralph, > Thank you for your review. Sorry I missed it earlier.
You're welcome. Looks like we have agreement on my editorial comments and suggestions. Will the edits you mention below appear in rev -15? - Ralph > > On 09/12/2015 20:47, Ralph Droms (rdroms) wrote: >> Nits/editorial comments: >> >> Nicely written, very clear document. > Thank you. >> idnits reports some lines too long and an unused reference. > I fixed the reference in my copy. I hope RFC Editor can help with lines which > are too long. >> In the third paragraph of the Introduction, I suggest removing the >> parentheses and editing the second sentence for clarity; specifically, what >> is "SCRAM data"? > I meant SCRAM requests and responses. >> You could probably omit the parentheses in the second paragraph of Setion 3, >> as well, I'm likely just arguing style. > Barry picked on this as well, so this was rewritten for clarity. >> The last sentence of the last paragraph of sectino 3 was unclear to me: >> which messages are referred to? > Message is the same as 'decoded "data" attribute' in the previous sentence. I > clarified that. >> I think, in the phrase "fail the authentication" in the fifth paragraph of >> section 8, you are using "fail" as a transitive verb, as in "the client >> considers the authentication of the message to have failed" > ... and does whatever is appropriate in this case. Which might be closing the > connection, retrying or trying another (non SCRAM) mechanism. >> . If I have that write, I suggest rewriting the containing sentence to >> improve the clarity. > > Best Regards, > Alexey > >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
