Last Call Review of draft-holmberg-dispatch-mcptt-rp-namespace-03
review-holmberg-dispatch-mcptt-rp-namespace-03-genart-lc-gont-2016-12-16-00

Request Review of draft-holmberg-dispatch-mcptt-rp-namespace
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 05)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2017-01-09
Requested 2016-12-12
Authors Christer Holmberg, Jörgen Axell
Draft last updated 2016-12-16
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -03 by Melinda Shore (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -03 by Fernando Gont (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Fernando Gont 
State Completed
Review review-holmberg-dispatch-mcptt-rp-namespace-03-genart-lc-gont-2016-12-16
Reviewed rev. 03 (document currently at 05)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2016-12-16

Review
review-holmberg-dispatch-mcptt-rp-namespace-03-genart-lc-gont-2016-12-16

** Technical **

* Section 3, pages 3-4:
>    Intended algorithm for mcpttq is queuing.
> 
>    New Warning code: No.
> 
>    New SIP response code: No.

Is this kind of thing really needed/required in the registry?



** Editorial **

* Section 1, page 2:
>    The third generation partnership project (3GPP)

May be you should capitalize these? (i.e., "Third Generation...")


* Section 1, page 2:
> In addition to this a commercial PTT
>    service for non-professional use (e.g., groups of people on holiday)

Please insert a comma after "this".


* Section 1, page 3:
> MCPTT data transfer currently under development can
>    benefit from a queueing mechanism.

"data transfer..." protocols?


* Section 2, page 3:
> The use of this namespace outside such network is
>    undefined.

s/network/networks/


* Section 5, page 5:
> 5.  IANA Considerations
> 
>    Abiding by the rules established within [RFC4412] and [RFC7134], this
>    is an Informative RFC registering two new namespaces, their
>    associated priority-values, and intended algorithms.

s/registering/creating/ ?