Skip to main content

Telechat Review of draft-ietf-mediactrl-call-flows-13
review-ietf-mediactrl-call-flows-13-genart-telechat-carpenter-2013-09-08-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-mediactrl-call-flows
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 13)
Type Telechat Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2013-09-10
Requested 2013-09-05
Authors Alessandro Amirante , Tobia Castaldi , Lorenzo Miniero , Simon Pietro Romano
I-D last updated 2013-09-08
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -13 by Brian E. Carpenter
Genart Telechat review of -13 by Brian E. Carpenter
Assignment Reviewer Brian E. Carpenter
State Completed
Request Telechat review on draft-ietf-mediactrl-call-flows by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Reviewed revision 13
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2013-09-08
review-ietf-mediactrl-call-flows-13-genart-telechat-carpenter-2013-09-08-00
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 wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a
new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-mediactrl-call-flows-13.txt (Informational)
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2013-09-08
IETF LC End Date: 2013-09-03
IESG Telechat date: 2013-09-12

Summary:  Ready
--------

Comment:
--------

This is a massive (175pp) and highly specialised document, for which a generalist
review is pretty much useless. I have not checked the example flows, XML extracts, etc.
IMHO, we have to trust the authors and the WG in a case like this.

The document is clear and where I have sampled the text in the examples it is
up to standard.

This review is the same as for Last Call; my comments are just editorial suggestions.

Editorial:
----------

There are a few abbreviations (AS, MS, CFW) that could usefully be included
in the Terminology section.

Also, AS is widely used in the IETF to mean Autonomous System. Some readers
might be confused at first, so this should be stated very clearly.

"Mealy automaton" (section 4.1) needs a reference. Or it might be sufficient
just to say "finite state automaton."