Re: [Gen-art] (full) review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-25.txt
In your previous mail you wrote: francis.dup...@fdupont.fr [mailto:francis.dup...@fdupont.fr] writes: ... Nits/editorial comments: Technical: - 13 page 147: I have a concern about 'TLS or IPsec handshake' because there is no such thing like 'IPsec handshake'. I suggest to ask IPsec people to check if this must be changed and if yes to get a better wording. This seems _very_ nit-picky to me ;-). While technically correct, IKE is often colloquially referred to as the IPsec handshake, e.g., by no less a personage than Radia Perlman (see http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipsec-ikev2-tutorial-01). = what about: IPsec - IPsec/IKE? It is more correct so everybody will be happy. Large scope editial: - Acknowledgements - Acknowledgments (ToC page 6, A. page 152 and in the text itself, for instance 1 page 7 in Failover) According to the Oxford Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, = IETF/RFC Editor adopted the American spelling without the 'e' both acknowledgement and acknowledgment are valid spellings, the difference being that the former is the British usage the latter the American. I prefer the British usage because it's just way more classy. Deal with it :-). = in general we should use American speliing in RFCs (even this worries Brittish and globally European persons who learnt UK-English as school :-). Thanks francis.dup...@fdupont.fr PS: please use the RFC Editor service for fixing editorial details. ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
Re: [Gen-art] (full) review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-25.txt
francis.dup...@fdupont.fr [mailto:francis.dup...@fdupont.fr] writes: ... Nits/editorial comments: Technical: - 13 page 147: I have a concern about 'TLS or IPsec handshake' because there is no such thing like 'IPsec handshake'. I suggest to ask IPsec people to check if this must be changed and if yes to get a better wording. This seems _very_ nit-picky to me ;-). While technically correct, IKE is often colloquially referred to as the IPsec handshake, e.g., by no less a personage than Radia Perlman (see http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipsec-ikev2-tutorial-01). Large scope editial: - Acknowledgements - Acknowledgments (ToC page 6, A. page 152 and in the text itself, for instance 1 page 7 in Failover) According to the Oxford Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, both acknowledgement and acknowledgment are valid spellings, the difference being that the former is the British usage the latter the American. I prefer the British usage because it's just way more classy. Deal with it :-). ... ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
[Gen-art] (full) review of draft-ietf-dime-rfc3588bis-25.txt
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-dime-rfc3588bis-25.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 2010-10-27 IETF LC End Date: 2010-10-25 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: Technical: - 13 page 147: I have a concern about 'TLS or IPsec handshake' because there is no such thing like 'IPsec handshake'. I suggest to ask IPsec people to check if this must be changed and if yes to get a better wording. Large scope editial: - Acknowledgements - Acknowledgments (ToC page 6, A. page 152 and in the text itself, for instance 1 page 7 in Failover) - i.e. - i.e., (for instance 2.1 page 23, 5.6 page 69) Editorial: - 1.1.3 page 12: please expand CER ad CEA at their first use. - 5.2 page 60: 'diameter.tls' - 'diameter.tls.tcp' (cf 11.6 page 145) - 5.6 page 70: both ends moves - both ends move - 6.6 page 84: a non-routable messages. - a non-routable message. - 6.7.2 page 84: local state information of Diameter node - local state information of the Diameter node - 6.7.4 page 85: by entities other Diameter entities. - by other Diameter entities. - 6.11 page 86: a CER or CEA messages. - a CER or CEA message. - 7 page 91: A command is received that is missing AVP(s) that (bad wording) - A received command which is ... - 7.1.5 page 96: (bad wording) The Failed-AVP AVPs MUST be present which contains - 7.1.5 page 97: avp - AVP (in code 5014 description) - 8 page 102: the applications itself - the application itself - 8.1 page 103: sessions maintains - sessions maintain - 8.1 pages 103 and 104: if it is possible I prefer: Result-Code = ... to Result-Code = ... - 9.3 page 128 (Split): maybe - may be - 9.6 page 131: [Acct-]Multi-Session- Id - [Acct-]Multi-Session-Id - Authors' page 158: ITU TS E.123 mandates a '+' before country code (i.e., +33 for France, +1 for USA and Canada, etc) Spelling: reauthentication - re-authentication Regards francis.dup...@fdupont.fr PS: I heavily used the IETF diff tool so bad wordings could be inherited from RFC 3588. ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
