I agree with the comments from Magnus. I can promise to also check the
next revision for consistency with the udpzero draft, but that would be
easier with the reorganisation, that Magnus has suggested.
I also add the following:
There are some pointers to use-cases in the introduction that a
Hi Magnus:
Very good comments, thank you. We'll make the changes and address these.
Marshall: Do you have the latest XML? If you send it to me, I can try to get
these comments addressed by early next week (Mon or Tue).
Thanks.
Regards, Phil
On 4/14/11 8:01 AM, "Magnus Westerlund"
wrote:
> (
(resend due to bad author alias address)
Hi,
I have made a review of the draft and have some comments on it.
1. Needs to indicate that it updates RFC2460 (when approved). This
usually goes into the header of the front page. The abstract and as part
of the introduction.
2. The abstract is way to
Hi,
I have made a review of the draft and have some comments on it.
1. Needs to indicate that it updates RFC2460 (when approved). This
usually goes into the header of the front page. The abstract and as part
of the introduction.
2. The abstract is way to meager. It needs to make clear, what it d
