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-intarea-provisioning-domains-09.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 20191220 IETF LC End Date: 20191225 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: - 3.1 page 6: the real purpose of the R-flag / inclusion of a RA header could be explained before examples of section 5, for instance in the introduction... - 3.4 page 10,3.4.3 page 11 (3 times) and 6 page 22 : e.g. -> e.g., - 4.4 page 17: I understand the text about the Subject Name (so it is not a minor issue) but RFC 5280 defines the Subject as a X.500 Distinguished Name so IMHO you mean the Subject Alternative Name. I propose to add "(Alternative)" between "Subject" and "Name" so the text should become fully correct without introducing extra / spurious details. - 8.3 page 24: Bit position 0, 1 and 2 are reserved -> assigned Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! francis.dup...@fdupont.fr _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
