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 revision | 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 | |
I-D 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 | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-holmberg-dispatch-mcptt-rp-namespace by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 03 (document currently at 05) | |
Result | Ready w/nits | |
Completed | 2016-12-16 |
review-holmberg-dispatch-mcptt-rp-namespace-03-genart-lc-gont-2016-12-16-00
** 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/ ?